RAM ADHAR SINGH PETITIONER Vs. RAMROOP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In Civil Appeal No 691 of 1966, the appellant, by special leave, granted by this Court, challenges the judgment and decree of the Allahabad High Court, dated April 20,. 1965, in Second Appeal No. 1602 of 1963. In Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 2631 of 1967, the appellant has prayed this Court to pass an order that Civil Appeal No 691 of l966 has abated, in view of the amended Section 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act. 1953 (U P Act V of 1954) (hereinafter referred as the Act) .

(2.) The appellant was the defendant, in a suit instituted by the respondents, under Section 209, of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. 1950 (U P Act I of 1950) (hereinafter referred to as the Abolition Act) . The plaintiff, claiming to be a bhumidar of the land, in question, instituted the suit out of which the second appeal arose against the appellant, for recovery of possession of the property on the ground that the appellant was a trespasser and that he was not entitled to remain in possession of the property. The trial Court, as well as the Appellate Court, have held that the plaintiff was the bhumidar, and the appellant has not established his tenancy right in the property and. as such, he was neither a sirdar nor an asami. On the other hand. the findings are that the appellant is only a trespasser On these findings. the plaintiff's suit was decreed. The appellant thereupon, challenged the decision of the two subordinate Courts in second appeal, before the High Court of Allahahad. The High Court has agreed with the conclusions, arrived at by the Subordinate Courts and dismissed the second appeal. This Court on June 15, 1965 granted special leave to the appellant to appeal against the judgment of the High Court.

(3.) According to the appellant, after the grant of special leave. by this Court. the State of Uttar Pradesh has published in the State Gazette, a notification, dated October 22, 1965, under Section 4 of the Act. The effect of that notification is that the plots, in dispute between the parties in this litigation, and which are situated in the village of Pureon, Pargana Bayalsi, in the District of Jaunpur, have been brought under the consolidation operation, by virtue of the Act. Section 5 of the Act, as it stood prior to its amendment in 1966, was as follows: