SURAJ PRASAD Vs. KRISHNA NAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a plaintiff's second appeal under Section 331 of the UPZA and LR Act preferred against the judgment and decree dated 30-6- 1 995 passed by 1 he learned Addition-al Commissioner, Varanasi Division, Varanasi arising out of the judgment and decree dated 7-8-1978 passed by the learned trial Court in a suit under Section 229-Bof the UPZ And LR Act.

(2.) BRIEF and relevant facts of the case are that the plaintiffs, Suraj Prasad and others instituted a suit under Section 229-B of the UPZA and LR Act against the defendants, Lalji and Ors. for declaration over the suit land as detailed at the foot of the plaint. The learned trial Court after com­pleting the requisite trial, dismissed the aforesaid suit on 7-8-1978. Aggrieved by this order, an appeal was preferred. The learned Additional Commissioner has upheld the aforesaid order passed by the learned trial Court and dismissed the appeal on 30-6-1995. Hence this second appeal.

(3.) I have given my thoughtful con­sideration to the contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the parties and have also gone through the relevant records on file. On a close examination of the records, it is evidently clear that the plaintiff-appel­lants have miserably failed to agitate the matter in question before the consolida­tion authorities concerned at the ap­propriate time. Moreover, they could not adduce any cogent and convincing evidence in support of their claims as to when and how they lost an area admeasur­ing .45 acre from their chak. From a bare perusal of the records, it is crystal clear that on the point of title, the matter has been finally Decided during the consolidation operations and all the relevant entries have been finally made in the records con­cerned. As such, I find myself unable to agree with the contentions raised by the Learned Counsel for the appellant.