JUDGMENT : In the available circumstances of the case the respondent no.2 being one of the defendants along with the applicants before the trial Court and did not challenge the impugned order hence, her presence is not required to adjudicate this revision. Consequently, the notice against the respondent no.2, if the same has not been served, is hereby dispensed with. Although this matter is listed today for consideration of I.A. No. 11322/07, an application for grant of stay against further proceedings of Civil Original Suit No. 78-A/06, pending in the Court of Ist Civil Judge Class-I Rewa, but in the available scenario of the case instead to hear the matter on the aforesaid I.A., taking into consideration that this revision is pending for adjudication since the year 2007, with the consent of the parties, the same is taken for final hearing. Heard. The applicants/defendants no.1 & 2, Society and Office Bearer respectively, have filed this revision being aggrieved by the order dated 23.7.2007 passed by Ist Civil Judge class-I Rewa, in Civil Suit No. 78- A/06 whereby, the application of the respondents filed under Section 151 of CPC for dismissal of the suit in view of the provision of Sections 64 & 82 of M.P. Co-operative Societies Act 1960, has been dismissed. In the course of arguments in response of some query of the Court based on the impugned transactions of the parties so also in view of the principle laid down by this Court in the matter of Rashtriya Adarsh Grih Nirman Sahkari Sansta vs. Laxmikant Bharadwaj reported in 1992 II M.P. Weekly Note 159 on making certain query from the applicants’ counsel on which, instead to press this revision for setting aside the impugned order in toto, prayed for appropriate direction to the trial Court that on after filing the written statement in the matter by the applicants so also other defendants if the aforesaid question is raised in the written statement, then after framing the issues on such question the same be considered and decided in accordance with the Scheme of Order 14 Rule 2 of CPC without influencing from any observations or findings given by such Court in the impugned order or by this Court in the present order and prayed to dispose of this revision accordingly. The other side did not have any objection in disposing of the revision in such a manner as prayed by the applicants counsel. On consideration by allowing the prayer of the applicants’ counsel this revision is disposed of with a direction to the trial Court that on taking the aforesaid objection raised in this revision, in the written statement on behalf of the applicant, then after framing the issues the same be considered and decided in accordance with the Scheme of Order 14 Rule 2 of CPC without influencing from any observations or findings by such Court in the impugned order or by this Court in the present order. Revision is disposed of as indicated above.