AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S.N. Shukla, Member.
This revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 1842002 passed by Upper UpZiladhikari, Bareilly on an application moved by defendant revisionists under Order VII, Rule 11 C.P.C. in Suit No. 37 of 2000 filed under Section 229B of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act.
Briefly, the facts of the case are that plaintiffopposite party filed a suit for declaration of his rights over the land in suit on the basis of a saledeed executed by the ancestors of the defendantsrevisionists in favour of plaintiffopposite party. During the pendency of the suit, an application under Order VII, Rule 11 C.P.C. was filed by the defendantrevisionists which was rejected by the trial Court on 1842002 holding that the plaint had been signed by the plaintiff. Apart from this, earlier objection to this effect taken by the defendantrevisionists was also rejected on 21101991. The present revision has been filed against this order.
I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.
The trial Court, after going through the plaint filed by the plaintiff arrived at a conclusion that there is no formal or legal defect in the plaint. It has rightly rejected the application filed under Order VII, Rule 11 C.P.C. by the defendant revisionists. No illegality or any material irregularity has been committed by the trial Court in passing the impugned order which may call for any interference by this Court.
In view of this, revision has no force and is accordingly dismissed.
Revision dismissed.