ORDER
V.S. Kokje, J.
1. Heard Shri S. C. Agrawal, learned counsel for the applicants and Shri R. C. Kochatta, learned counsel for the non-applicants.
2. In this revision application non-framing of additional issues by the trial court has been challenged. Shri Agrawal submits that the impugned order is a non-speaking order and, therefore, deserves to be set aside. Shri Kochatta submits that the application has been moved mala fide to any how delay the proceedings.
3. On perusal of the record, it is clear that no way of additional pleadings the tenability of the suit against the legal representatives of the deceased Khushalsingh was challenged on several grounds. The trial Court framed an issue as to the tenability in general terms but did not frame specific issues on every ground of challenge. However, no prejudice is likely to be caused to the applicants as general issues to the tenability of the suit against the L.R.’s of the deceased Khushalsingh has been framed, and the ground on which the suit is challenged as untenable can be raised under the issue. There is, therefore, no scope for interference with the order of the trial Court. There is no jurisdictional error committed by the trial Court and even if the order could be capricious as a non-speaking order, it will not cause any failure of justice.
4. This revision has, therefore, no force and is hereby dismissed. The applicant shall pay to the non-applicant costs of this case-Counsel’s fees Rs. 500/-.