RAMESHWAR PRASAD Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) :-

(2.) THIS petition is directed against orders determining surplus area of petitioner under U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act. The questions that survive for consideration are whether daughters of predeceased son can be considered to be members of family for the benefit of two additional hectares in Sec. 3(3) and whether Hindu widow was entitled to share in ancestral sir and Khudkasht.

(3.) THE finding that petitioner's mother was not entitled to a share in Sir and Khudkasht land appears to be well founded. THE appellate authority held that there was no evidence on record to prove that her husband died after 1938. THE evidence of petitioner was rejected as insufficient to establish the time of death. THE argument that as that was only evidence and it should have been accepted does not have any merit.