LAWS(ALL)-2000-12-129

GAJENDRA SINGH Vs. BABU RAM

Decided On December 05, 2000
GAJENDRA SINGH Appellant
V/S
BABU RAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a second appeal under Section 331 of the UPZA and LR Act preferred against the judgment and order dated 9-7-1996 passed by the learned Additional Commissioner, Moradabad Division, Moradabad arising out of an order dated 10-5-1994 passed by the learned trial Court in a suit under Section 229-B of the UPZAand LR Act.

(2.) BRIEF the relevant facts of the case are that the plaintiff, Babu Ram instituted a suit under Section 229-B of the UPZA and LR Act with the prayer that he be declared bhumidhar with transferable rights over the land in suit as detailed in para 1 of the plaint on the basis of the sale deed executed in his favour by the tenure-holder, Dharampal. The learned trial Court after completing the requisite trial dismissed thcsuit on 10-5-1994. Aggrieved by this order an appeal was preferred. The learned lower appellate Court by means of its order dated 9-7-1996 has allowed this appeal. Hence this second appeal.

(3.) I have carefully and closely con­sidered the contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the parties and have also gone through the relevant records on file. On a closcexamination of the record, I find that the learned lower appellate Court has properly and thoroughly analysed dis­cussed and considered the relevant and material facts and circumstances of the instant case in correct perspective of law. 1 entirely agree with the conclusion drawn by it as a bare perusal of the records clearly reveals that the defendant-appellant is not proved to be the son of the deceased, Ram Chandra. The learned lower appellate Court has rightly recorded the finding that the heir/son of the deceased Ram Chandra is Dharampal who has executed the sale-deed in favour of the Respondent No. 1, Babu Ram who has been found bhumidhar with transferable rights over the disputed land. The learned trial Court has not con­sidered the relevant and material evidence on record in true perspective of law. The findings recorded by the learned trial Court is quite erroneous perverse and un­justified and as such are liable to be set aside.