RAM BRIKSHA Vs. DY. DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri D.S.P. Singh, counsel for the petitioners and Sri A.P. Tiwari, for the contesting respondent.

(2.) THE counsel for the petitioners submitted that the names of the petitioners were recorded over the land in dispute, since 1359 F. Ram Belash (respondent -4) did not file any objection, claiming his rights, in previous consolidation, as such, his objection in subsequent consolidation proceeding, claiming right in it, is barred under Section 49 of under U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(3.) SECTION 49 of the Act was initially enacted as follows:. - Section 49. -Bar to Civil Court Jurisdiction. - No person shall institute any suit or other proceeding in any Civil Court with respect to any matter arising out of consolidation proceeding or under the provision of this Act. By U.P. Act No. 38 of 1958, Section 49 was amended as follows: - Section 49. -Bar to Civil Court Jurisdiction. - Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the declaration and adjudication of right of tenure holder, in respect of any land lying in any area, for which notification has been issued under sub -section (2) of section 4 or adjudication of any other right arising out of consolidation proceedings and in regard to which a proceeding could or ought to have been taken under the Act, shall be done in accordance with the provisions of this Act and no Civil or Revenue Court shall entertain any suit or proceeding with respect to rights in such land or with respect to any other matters for which a proceeding could or ought to have been taken under the Act.