ORDER

1. The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution is preferred by the petitioners being crestfallen by the order dated 9.11.2022 passed by the I Additional District Judge Gohad District Bhind whereby Miscellaneous Appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1 (r) of CPC preferred at the instance of respondent No.2(a)/defendant No.2(a) was partly allowed and matter was remanded back to the trial Court for fresh adjudication of application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC preferred by the petitioners/plaintiffs (vide I.A.No.1/2022) and another application preferred by defendant No.2(a) under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC (I.A.No.06/2022) for analogous hearing.

2. Precisely stated facts of the case are that the plaintiffs/petitioners were co-owners of one piece of the land and went for partition before Tahsildar. Vide order dated 22.9.2009 land was partitioned by Tahsildar. On 5.5.2011 SDO, allowed the appeal of plaintiff/petitioner No.2 -Malti and set aside the order of partition and remanded the matter to Tahsildar for fresh hearing. Grievance of Malti before SDO was that she was not given opportunity of hearing in partition proceedings.

3. On 2.3.2015, Tahsildar recorded co