MATA BADAL Vs. RAM HIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 24-4-1997 passed by the learned Additional Commissioner, Jhansi Division, Jhansi in appeal No. 48/87/128 of 1990-91/Banda, dismissing the same and confirming the judgment and decree dated 22-12-1990 passed by the learned trial Court, in a suit under Section 229-B of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts, giving rise to the instant second appeal are that the plaintiffs, Ram Hit etc. instituted a suit under Section 229-B of the Act against the defendants State of U.P. etc. for declaration of their rights as Bhumidhars of the land in dispute with tranferable rights, inter alia pleading that since the original tenure-holder, Bharosa died issueless and the land in dispute was succeeded by his daughter's sons i.e. defendants 4 to 7, they executed a registered sale-deed on 12-2-1976 in favour of the father of the plaintiffs, Shiv Mohan and transferred its possession as well and therefore, after the death of their father, the plaintiffs are the Bhumidhars in possession of the land in dispute with transferable rights. On notice, the defendants 4 to 7 admitted the claim of the plaintiffs, while the defendant No. 3, Mata Badal contested the suit, inter alia pleading that since the Zamindar of the land in dispute was Mahant Shiv Ram Das, who executed a sale-deed in favour of his father, the plaintiffs have no claim whatsoever because the alleged sale-deed, executed in favour of the father of the plaintiffs is forged and fraudulent and the defendants 4 to 7 have no title to the land in dispute. The State of U.P. have described the land in dispute to be the property of the Gaon Sabha, concerned. The learned trial Court, after completing the requisite trial, decreed the suit of the plaintiffs, vide its judgment and decree dated 22-12-1990 against which an appeal was preferred by Mata Badal before the learned Additional Commissioner who has dismissed the same, vide his judgment and decree dated 24-4-1997 and therefore, it is against these judgments and decrees that the instant second appeal has been preferred by Mata Badal before the Board.

(3.) I have closely and carefully considered the arguments advances before me by the learned Counsel for the parties and have also scanned the record on file. The crux of the matter in question is whether or not in the facts and circumstances of the instant case as well as the evidence on the record, the learend Courts below were justified in decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs and which of the two sale-deeds was valid and genuine, transferring rights and title to the land in dispute to the vendee. A bare perusal of the record on file clearly reveals that both the Courts below after due and proper appreciation of evidence on record are of the clear view that the defendant No. 3 had never been in possession in any capacity, what to say of the illegal occupation of the land in dispute while as per the entries in 1360-61-F the name of the maternal grand-father of the defendants 4 to 7 find place in the revenue records over the land in dispute and after his death, the plaintiffs are the only persons who are legally entitled to be declared as Bhumidhars of the same with transferable rights by dint of succession, as Bharosa had no son and the land in dispute was succeeded by his daugthers sons, defendants 4 to 7. The concurrent findings of fact, recorded by the learned Courts below are saturated in itself being duly arrived at after a proper and analytical appraisal of evidence on record which cannot be disturbed at this second appellate stage. They have rather dealt with the matter in question through and through logically in correct perspective of law and therefore, no interference is called for by this Court with the impugned judgments and decrees passed by them. The contentions of the learned Counsel for the appellant who has miserably failed to substantiate his claim, are rather untenable for the aforesaid simple reasons and therefore, I, in the facts and circumstances of the instant case as well as the evidence on record, am fully convinced that the suit of the plaintiffs has rather very rightly been decreed and nothing remains to be decided in this second appeal which very richly deserves dismissal outright.