KEWLA Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri R.N. Tilhari, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri M. Tauseef, learned counsel for contesting respondents.

(2.) This writ petition arises out of consolidation proceedings pertaining to title dispute. The dispute was raised by the contesting respondents in the form of objections under Section 9-A(2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act in respect of several plots claiming co-tenancy with the original petitioner Jagannath, who was recorded in the revenue record as exclusive tenure-holder. All the three courts below, i.e. C.O., S.O.C. and D.D.C. accepted the claim of the contesting respondents of co-tenancy over part of the land regarding which objections had been filed. The objections were allowed in respect of plot Nos.50, 60, 220 and 224 (old plots No.42, 53, 188 and 193) and it was directed that names of contesting respondents being co-tenants along with the original petitioners should be recorded along with him in the revenue record. However the claim of co-tenancy of the contesting respondents, in respect of other plots was rejected and that matter became final.

(3.) According to the contesting respondents, Sukhai was the common ancestor of the parties. C.O. Patti where the matter had been registered as Case No.744 decided the same on 03.06.1970. Against the said order, Appeal No.360 was filed by the original petitioner Jagannath, which was dismissed on 10.09.1970 by S.O.C. Pratapgarh. Against the said order, original petitioner filed Revision No.125-A/98, which was dismissed by D.D.C., Pratapgarh on 08.02.1971, hence this writ petition which was initially filed at Allahabad but later on transferred to Lucknow where it was renumbered.