TRILOKI Vs. TULSI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a ref­erence dated 13-6-1983 made by the learned Additional Commissioner, Varanasi Division, Varanasi in respect of revision petition No. 103 of 1981 Jaunpur with his recommendation that the order dated 13-3-1981 passed by the learned trial court be set aside and the lease in question • be cancelled. Written objection dated 30-9-1997 was filed on behalf of the opposite parties, Tulsi & Ors. with the prayer that the order dated 13-3-1981 passed by the learned trial Court as well as the lease in question be maintained as before.

(2.) BRIEF and relevant facts of the case are that an application under Section 198 (4) of the UPZA and LR Act was moved on behalf of one Triloki Nath for setting aside the lease granted in favour of the opposite parties Sunder and Ors. The learned trial Court after completing the requisite for­malities, rejected the aforesaid applica­tion on 13-3-1981. Aggrieved by this order, a revision petition was preferred. The learned Additional Commissioner has made this reference with his aforesaid recommendation.

(3.) I have closely and carefully con­sidered the submission made by the learned Counsel for the revisionist and have also gone through the relevant records on file. Having scrutinised the matter in question, I find that the learned lower revisional Court has properly examined the matter in ques­tion and has rightly recommended for set­ting aside the aforesaid order dated 13-3-1981 passed by the learned trial Court as it has not considered the facts and circumstan­ces of the instant case in correct perspective of law. 1 entirely agree with the aforesaid recommendation made by the learned Addi­tional Commissioner. To my mind, no error of fact, law or jurisdiction has been com­mitted by him.