S.P. Srivastava, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved by an order dated 7-12-1996 passed by the First Appellate Court whereunder allowing the appeal and setting aside the order of the trial Court, rejecting the application filed by the plaintiffs under Order 22, Rule 3, Civil Procedure Code seeking to bring on record the heirs and legal representatives of Mataprasad, the defendant No. 1 the said application has been granted, the proposed defendant has now approached this Court seeking reversal of the impugned order and restoration of the order of the trial Court.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the defendant-applicant as well as the learned counsel representing the contesting respondents and have also carefully perused the record.

3. The facts in brief, shorn of details and necessary for disposal of this case lie in a narrow compass. The suit giving rise to this revision had been filed by the plaintiff-respondents Nos. 1 to 6 against Mataprasad, who was impleaded as defendant No. 1 and the Madhya Pradesh State Government through Collector, which had been impleaded as defendant No. 2. The plaintiffs claimed a declaratory decree to the effect that the plaintiffs Nos. 1 and 2 were co-own