Hari Nath Tilhari, J.—A review petition has been filed from the Order dated 30th of November, 1999, delivered by Brother Hon'ble Sri Venkatesh Murthy, J., in Civil Revision No. 2669 of 1999, without notice being served on Respondents 1, 2, 4 to 8.

2. The revision has arisen from an order dated 5.8.1999, passed on I.A. No. 15, in original suit O.S. No. 71 of 1986, under Section 92.

3. This Court in Appeal Regular First Appeal No. 33 of 1992, observed that:

When clause (ii) of the scheme clearly deletes the clause mentioned in the title deed without giving opportunity to the Appellant the order passed cannot be said to be a consent order, as reasons have not been given and on the allegations, it amounts to giving a finding without materials being placed or opportunity provided to the Appellant. In this regard, the order passed by the learned District Judge has to be set aside.

After having set aside the judgment given in the suit, this Court remanded back the matter to the District Judge to give both the parties, opportunity to lead further evidence with respect to Clause (ii), and to dispose of the entire matter afresh after giving opportunity to both the parties to frame proper s