- (1.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellants has given a valid explanation for the defects pointed out by the Registry. It is submitted that respondent No.4 was a party-respondent in the writ petition. He is heir of Late Shri Manohar Lal, and since he was already a party as a respondent, it was not necessary to include him in the amended cause title in the writ petition. The defect will thus be treated to be removed.
(2.) We have heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants.
(3.) This intra-court Special Appeal arises out of the judgment dated 14.11.2014 passed by learned Single Judge in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.5855/1997 (Manohar Lal (dead) through LRs. & Anr. Vs. The Board of Revenue & Ors.), by which learned Single Judge has confirmed the judgment of the Board of Revenue, Ajmer dated 23.07.1997, setting aside the judgment and decree dated 24.08.1993 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority, Alwar, and upheld the judgment and decree dated 09.01.1986 passed by the Assistant Collector, Rajgarh, Laxmangarh, District Alwar, whereby the plaintiff-respondent's suit for declaration of khatedari rights and partition, in respect of 1/4 of the agricultural land measuring 21 bigha 7 biswa in khasra Nos.223, 225, 226, 227, 333, 1020, 1021 and 1022 at Village Ganduda, Tehsil Laxmangarh, District Alwar, was decreed.;