RAM LAKHAN Vs. RAM SAMUJH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Second Appeal No. 2047 of 1974 is directed against the judgment and decree of the III Addl. District Judge, Basti, dated 7.11.1970. The plaintiff-appellant filed a suit for cancellation of a sale deed dated 24.12.1966 said to have been executed by Smt. Jeochha and Ram Baran in respect of two sets of properties Bhumidhari and sirdari. The learned Munsif Khalilabad by his judgment dated 7.11.1970 decreed the suit partly and cancelled the sale deed in respect of ⅓rd share of Ram Baran in list B. The rest of the sale deed was held to be valid and the suit in that behalf was dismissed. Ram Lakhan, plaintiff, filed an appeal being Civil Appeal No. 258 of 1970 and Ram Samujh, defendant, filed Civil Appeal No. 3 of 1971. These appeals were directed against the judgment of the Munsif in so far as went against them. The III Additional District Judge, Basti, allowed the appeal of Ram Samujh and dismissed the appeal of Ram Samujh and dismissed the appeal of Ram Lakhan with the result that the entire suit for cancellation of the sale deed was dismissed. Ram Lakhan has filed this appeal (S.A. No. 2047 of 1974) as also another appeal, Second Appeal No. 2048 of 1974. There was no necessity for him to file this latter appeal as the controversy could be fully covered by filing only one appeal.

(2.) The short point that arises for determination in these appeals is as to when does a sirdar acquire transferable rights on his deposit of the amount equal to 20 times the land revenue. Learned counsel for the appellant urged that the date on which orders are passed by the Assistant Collector granting Sanad is the crucial date when the Sirdar acquires transferable rights. It was urged that in the instant case Ram Baran, since deceased, who had ⅓rd share was a sirdar and he made the deposit of the requisite land revenue and an application for acquiring Bhumidhari rights on 24.12.1966 and on the same day he executed a sale deed in favour of the respondent. It was said that Ram Baran died a day after the sale deed and the Sanad was granted on 28.9.1968. It was further said that on the date when the Sanad was granted Ram Baran was dead and Sanad could not be issued in the name of dead person. Learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand urged that mere deposit of the requisite land revenue and making of an application for acquisition of Bhumidhari rights was enough to clothe with the applicant the right to make a transfer and the transfer by way of a sale deed made the same day was valid as held by the first appellate court.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties at great length and come to the conclusion that mere deposit of the requisite land revenue and making of an application under Sec. 134 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act is not enough to vest Bhumidhari rights on the date the deposit was made and the transferable rights are acquired on the date when the application is considered by the Assistant Collector and the Sanad is granted. This requires consideration of the various provisions for the grant of a Sanad.