JUDGMENT 1. Heard by consent of learned counsel appearing for rival parties. 2. This second appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 27.6.2012, passed by the learned District Judge-3, Nagpur, in Regular Civil Appeal No.170 of 2010, whereby the appeal was allowed in following terms, thus: ORDER I) The appeal is hereby allowed. II) The judgment and order passed on 25.1.2010 by the learned trial Court in RCS No.7/2009 is hereby quashed and set aside. II) The respondent-plaintiff to pay the costs of the appeal to the appellants. IV) A decree be drawn up accordingly. V) Dictated and delivered in open Court. The said appeal arose from judgment and order dated 25.1.2010, passed by the learned Fourth Joint Civil Judge Junior Division, Nagpur, in Regular Civil Suit No.7 of 2009, which was decreed. 3. It appears that the first appellate Court decided to reverse the decree which was granted in favour of the plaintiff-appellant, whereby it was held that the application for regularization made by the plaintiff appellant was wrongly rejected. The controversy between the parties as to whether area of open space admeasuring 500 square feet approx. lying on the east of the plot No.164 admeasuring 1500 square feet could have been regularized as an addition to the plot in possession of the plaintiff-appellant. The parties do not dispute as it is an open piece of land admeasuring of about 500 square feet of irregular size adjacent to plot No.164 which according to the layout was only 1500 square feet in area. 4. My attention has been invited to the Nagpur Improvement Trust Land Disposal Rules, 1983. In Rule 6(3) the land belonging to the Nagpur Improvement Trust not exceeding 300 square meters which cannot be sold as an individual plot can be transferred to a plot holder which adjacent to such open and irregular space. The Committee constituted under Sub rule (2) of Rule 7 for fixation of premium on account of disposal of such land may take decision to transfer irregular piece of land to the holder of an adjacent plot who made an application for allotment of such adjacent irregular piece of land as an addition to adjacent plot holder for better beneficial use and enjoyment of plot in his possession as some more lands added to the area of his plot subject to condition as to premium etc. fixed by the Committee for land disposal in accordance with the Nagpur Improvement Trust Land Disposal Rules, 1983. 5. That being so, it was necessary for the respondents to consider the application in the light of the Rules as applicable in the present case by the Committee duly constituted under the Rules to take the reasoned decision to allot irregular 500 square feet approx. land adjacent to plot No.164 to the plaintiff as possessor subject to fixation of premium etc. as conditions for allotment of the adjacent land in favour of plot holder concerned. 6. In my opinion, therefore, it was open for the appellant (original plaintiff) to move the competent authority of the Nagpur Improvement Trust with an application for allotment of adjacent piece of land giving details as to the area of such land which is adjacent to plot No.164 (suit plot) in occupation of plaintiff – appellant so as to enable the Nagpur Improvement Trust to decide allotment and to fix conditions as to premium etc. and to take decision regarding allotment of the irregular size of adjacent plot to the plot holder claiming that this plot is adjacent to it. Hence, following order is passed. It is open for the appellant plaintiff to move an appropriate application giving details as to the area of the plot in her possession and also details as to the adjacent open space with area thereof; size etc. by annexing an appropriate map along with the application of the layout concerned so that competent authority (The Committee duly constituted under the Rules) would consider the application in accordance with the Nagpur Improvement Trust Land Disposal Rules, 1983 and pass an appropriate reasoned order regarding allotment, transfer, refusal thereof etc. so that such reasoned order is communicated to the appellant plaintiff within reasonable period preferably within four weeks after the decision is given and leaving the plaintiff to adopt appropriate remedy if the decision goes adverse to the plaintiff (appellant). Such application if so desired as above be made within a period of four weeks from the date of this order. Upon such application being made, the same shall be decided according to law within a period of four weeks from the date of the receipt of the application and the decision in writing shall be communicated to the plaintiff (appellant) as stated above. 7. Upon such application being made, the same shall be decided according to law within a period of four weeks from the date of the receipt of the application and the decision in writing shall be communicated to the plaintiff (appellant) as stated above. 7. Second Appeal No.63 of 2013 stands disposed of accordingly.