The respondent being aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 7.12.1992 filed a Civil Revision Petition No.
In the said suit a preliminary decree was passed on 24.1.1975 in respect of the properties in dispute.
1 was allowed and a direction was given to the Additional District Judge, to make afresh adjudication of the objections filed on behalf of the parties, to the report of the Commissioner.
15175 of 1991 was filed before this Court, on behalf of the respondent, which was disposed of on 3.3.1992.
This application was entertained because after the death of Jamuna Prasad, respondent claimed to be his one of the legal heirs.
Jamuna Prasad and Ganga Prasad were defendants in the said suit.
The application filed by the said respondent was allowed by the Additional District Judge on 13.7,1990, The appellant being arrived by the said order filed a Civil Revision Petition before the High Court.
On 1.9.1986, the appeal which had been filed before the High Court on behalf of Jamuna Prasad and Ganga Prasad, was disposed of in terms of the petition of companypromise.
Jamuna Prasad died on 7.1.1987 leaving behind the appellant as his widow and two sons, and four daughters including the respondent.
Jamuna Prasad and Ganga Prasad filed an appeal before the High Court against the said decree.
That petition was rejected on 22.2.1983.
The High Court was of the opinion that the application dated 6.5.1989 filed on behalf of the respondent was maintainable but the Trial Court has to decide afresh as to what share she was entitled after hearing all the parties companycerned.
On 5.5.1980, a petition of companypromise was filed on behalf of Dhanpat Rai, Jamuna Prasad and Ganga Prasad in the High Court.
1 hereinafter referred to as the appellant Mrs. Manju Shukla, respondent No.
151 of 1993 before the High Court, which has been disposed of by the impugned order dated 21.4.1994.
1 hereinafter referred to as the respondent is one of the daughters of the aforesaid Jamuna Prasad.
Against the said order of the High Court, Special Leave Petition Civil No.
During the preparation of the final decree on 6.5.1989 respondent filed a petition claiming 1/3rd share in the properties.
A suit for partition was filed in the year 1965 by Dhanpat Rai.
It may be mentioned that in that in the present appeal, we are companycerned with the branch of Jamuna Prasad, who had two sons and four daughters, apart from his wife, who is appellant No.
P. Singh, J. Leave granted.
This appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellants, for setting aside an order dated 21.4.1994, passed by the High Court of Rajasthan.
By the aforesaid order, the Revision Petition of Respondent No.
On 28.6.1982, the respondent made an application before the High Court, to be impleaded as a party being the daughter of Jamuna Prasad.
