Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. None is present for Respondent No. 2 to 7. Counsel for Respondent No. 1 is present in the court by whom the impugned order has been passed .
In this writ petition the impugned order and judgement passed by the Additional District Judge, Kheri, is sought to be quashed. An application under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C. was allowed by the impugned order. The present writ petition has been filed by the defendant of suit No. 929 of 1999.
It is submitted from the side of the petitioner that the suit was not maintainable, because, the name of plaintiffs respondent No. 2 to 7 is ordered to be deleted from revenue records . An alternative remedy is also available with the plaintiff to file the suit in respect of the declaration of his title before the competent Revenue Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner requested to decide this petition finally with liberty to file the written statement before the court below and to press his grievances before the trial court in pursuance of issue frame in this regard.
Aforesaid questions could be considered and decided by framing a proper issue in this regard in the light of the pleadings of parties. Therefore, this court is refrain itself to discuss the facts and law relating to issue in question.
This court is fully agree with the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Consequently, the writ petition is finally disposed of with the following directions :
I. The trial court will frame issue of ouster of jurisdiction in the light of the pleadings of the parties and will decided the same expeditiously.
II. The parties are directed to maintain status co in respect of the property till the issue finally decided by the trial court.
There is no order as to cost.
Order Date :- 25.5.2012 S. Kumar