, J.

1. This revision petition is directed against an order, dated 14th June, 1972, of the Subordinate Judge First Class, Rohtak, whereby he allowed the plaintiff to abandon his claim with regard to the non-agricultural property in suit, and also permitted the plaintiff to amend the plaint not only for deleting those portions that related to the abandoned claim, but also to state with clarity that the vendor was a profligate, etc., and the sale was effected without necessity. There is an observation in the impugned order to the effect that the plaint is rejected with regard to that part of the property in respect of which the claim had been abandoned by the plaintiff.

2. Same material facts may be noted.

3. The plaintiff is the son of Pt. Nand Lal. He claimed the usual declaration that the sale effected by his father and uncles in favour of the other defendants was void qua his rights as it was made without consideration and without any legal necessity. The sale in question embraced in its scope three kinds of properties, namely. (a) agricultural land, (b) a house bearing survey Nos. 132 and 133, and (c) a plot of land (building site). He paid Court fee on the value of agri