KARAN SINGH Vs. BUDHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. P. Pandey, J. This is a revision under Section 333 of UPZA and LR Act, preferred against the judgment and decree, dated July 17, 1951, passed by the learned Additional Commissioner, Jhansi Division, Jhansi, arising out of an order dated 22-1-95, passed by the learned trial Court in a suit under Section 229-B of UPZA and LR Act.

(2.) BRIEF and relevant facts of the case are that the plaintiff instituted a suit under Section 229b of UPZA and LR Act against the defendant Surat and others for declaration over the disputed land as detailed at the fool of the plaint. The learned trial Court after completing the requisite trial dismissed the aforesaid suit on 22-1-85. Aggrieved by this order an appeal was preferred. The learned Addi tional Commissioner allowed the appeal on July 17, 1991 and set aside the aforesaid order passed by the learned trial Court. Hence this second revision.

(3.) HAVING closely examined the mat ter in question I find that the learned Addi tional Commissioner has properly ex amined the relevant and material facts and the circumstances of the instant case in true perspective of law and has recorded clear and categorical finding to the effect that under the provision of Section 171 of UPZA and LR Act, Shyam Lal is entitled to be heir a real brother of the deceased brother Fundi in preference to his married daughter. I entirely agree with the con clusion drawn by him in the aforesaid order dated July 17, 1991. No manifest error of law, fact or jurisdiction has been committed by him warranting any in ference by this Court in this second revision.