JUDGMENT - DABHOLKAR N.V., J.:---Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties.

2. Rule. By consent, rule is made returnable forthwith.

3. This revision petition arises out of the order passed on 14-1-2002 by the learned II Joint Civil Judge J.D. Jalna below Exhibit 111 in Regular Civil Suit No. 547 of 1996. Limited details regarding facts which are not disputed and requisite for present petition, are as follows.

Respondents are plaintiffs. They filed the suit for declaration of title and possession of agricultural lands. They claimed that the properties were owned by their grand father and inherited by them through their uncle, since father predeceased uncle and thereafter, the uncle acted as Karta of the joint family.

Defendants approached with a plea that uncle and eldest brother of plaintiff (who is now dead) had agreed to sale the suit land in favour of defendant No. 1. In the alternative, it is claimed that if the isar pavati has not passed the title in favour of defendants, they have become owners by adverse possession.

4. After conclusion of recording of evidence, before the arguments could be opened by both the lawyers, application Exhibit 111 was filed by plaintiff reques

Click Here to Read the rest of this document