RADEHY Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS filed a suit under Sec. 229-B of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in 1983 in the Court of the S. D. M. , Sadabad, district Mathura for a declaration that they have perfected their title to the land in dispute by adverse possession. The suit was decreed by order dated 2-6-1984. The respondents being aggrieved filed an appeal in the Court of the Additional Commissioner, Agra, which was allowed on 9-1-1985. The petitioners, thereafter filed a second appeal before the Board of Revenue, which has been dismissed on 16-1-1986 and a review application filed by the petitioners before the Board of Revenue was also dismissed on 8-1-1988. PETITIONERS have now filed this writ petition before this Court against the orders, passed by the Additional Commissioner and the Board of Revenue.

(2.) THE sole point argued before me by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the report of the Naib Tahsildar is admissible in evidence under Sections 35 and 74 of the Evidence Act and the learned Additional Commissioner and the Board of Revenue were not justified in declaring the report as inadmissible.

(3.) IT is admitted that the Naib Tahsildar, whose report is sought to be relied upon by the petitioners was not produced in this case and the respondents had no opportunity to cross-examine him. In such a situation the report of the Naib Tahsildar is not admissible under Sec. 35 or 74 of the Evidence Act.