BINDA PRASAD Vs. GARIB PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal has been filed by Binda Pd. against the judgment and decree dated 25-10-99 passed by learned Additional Commis­sioner, Chitrakoot arising out of a suit under Sections 229-B and 176 of the UPZA and LR Act. By the impugned order the learned Additional Commis­sioner allowed the appeal and declared the plaintiff Garib Pd. to be co-tenant of the land in question alongwith defendant.

(2.) BRIEFLY the facts of the case are that Garib Pd. instituted a suit for the declara­tion and division of his share in the dis­puted land. He pleaded that the land in question was ancestral and the name of the defendant alone had been wrongly recorded in revenue papers. The defen­dant Binda Pd. claimed that the land in question was his sole and exclusive acquisi­tion and the plaintiff Garib Prasad had no right. The trial Court gave both the parties full opportunity to adduce evidence and of being heard. It dismissed the suit. Garib Pd. filed an appeal which was allowed by the learned Additional Commissioner. Binda Pd. has now come up in second appeal.

(3.) A perusal of the record reveals that in 1333 Fasli name of Banshgopal father of the plaintiff and defendant is recorded as Shikmi Kashtkar. In 1356 Fasli Binda Pd. is recorded as Shikmi of the land only with a duration of 13 years. It has come in evidence of that 1356F the age of Binda Pd was 14 years. The learned Additional Commissioner took note of this fact and rightly observed that at the time when Binda Pd claims to have acquired the land in his own exclusive name his age would be one year and by no stretch of imagination it could (sic) be that he acquired the land in question exclusively. Father of both the parties was once the owner and tenant of the land it would be deemed that the land came down to the parties from the time of their father and both of them are entitled to have 1/2 share in the land in dispute. The learned Additional Commissioner has bound that the land in question was an­cestral property of the parties and both have 1/2 share.