JUDGMENT : Rafiq, J. This is an application in revision from an order of the Subordinate Judge of Barielly, permitting the plaintiffs to withdraw their suit with leave to bring a fresh suit. It appears that the plaintiffs instituted a suit in the court of the Munsif of Pilibhit to recover possession of certain land. Their claim was resisted by the applicants and the learned Munsif came to the conclusion that the plaintiffs (opposite party) had failed to prove their title to the land in dispute. An appeal was preferred to the District Judge which was transferred for disposal to the Subordinate Judge. The plaintiffs filed an application to the Subordinate Judge on the 3rd of January, 1913, asking to be allowed to withdraw their suit with leave to bring a fresh suit on the ground that a decree dated 1889 had not been filed in the case and that the Commissioner who was appointed by the court of first instance to make a local inspection and report, was unable to say how far did the plot No. 135 extend. It would seem that the land in suit was alleged by the opposite party to be a part of No. 135. The Subordinate Judge, in spite of opposition of the applicants, allowed the suit to be withdrawn with leave to bring a fresh suit. The defendant respondents come up here in revision and they contend that the lower appellate court has exercised its jurisdiction with material irregularity allowing the plaintiff's to withdraw their suit. The application dated the 3rd of January, 1913 and the order of the lower appellate court distinctly show that the ground on which the permission was granted under Order 23, rule I, was the incompleteness of the evidence in support of the title of the plaintiffs. The provisions of Order 23, rule I, are never meant to help a plaintiff to make up a gap in the evidence discovered during the pendency of his appeal. No case has been cited to me in which it has been held that the absence or incompleteness of evidence on behalf of a plaintiff is a sufficient ground for granting permission under Order 23, rule I. I allow this application, set aside the order of the Subordinate Judge and direct that the appeal be restored to its file and be disposed of according to law. The costs of this application are allowed to the applicants.