PHUL CHAND YADAV Vs. KEDAR YADAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) The absurdity of the view taken by 5th A.D.J., Azamgarh while passing the impugned judgment and order dated 16.11.1996 through which Civil Revision No. 270 of 1993 was allowed is not only shocking to the judicial conscience but also to the common sense.

(3.) Respondent Nos. 1 and 2, Kedar Yadav and Ram Lal Yadav instituted O.S. No. 95 of 1965 against Balraj Yadav since deceased and survived by the three Petitioners, Gram Sabha Pitamberpur and State of U.P. who were proforma Defendants. The relief claimed in the plaint of the suit was for removal of two huts, some cattle troughs cattle pegs and gher put by Balaraj Yadav. The suit was dismissed by the trial court. However, appeal filed against the said judgment and decree was allowed by the lower appellate court. Against the judgment and decree passed by the lower appellate court a Second appeal No. 785 of 1969 was filed in this High Court. In the second appeal stay order was granted, however, the second appeal was dismissed in default. Thereafter the second appeal was restored but mean while Plaintiffs Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 got possession of the property in dispute in execution of the decree (passed by the lower appellate court). Thereafter, second appeal was allowed on 22.09.1982. judgment and decree passed by the lower appellate court was set aside and judgment and decree passed by the trial court (dismissing the suit) was restored.