FAGOO RAM Vs. RAM LAUT (DIED)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Prabhat Kumar, learned counsel for the appellants and Shri Mohan Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no.3.

(2.) This second appeal has been filed for setting aside the judgment and decree dtd. 25/1/2024 passed by the First Appellate Court i.e.Additional District Judge, Court No.1, Sultanpur in Civil Appeal No.182 of 2001 (Fagoo Ram And Others vs. Ram Laut and Others) and the judgement and decree dtd. 22/10/2011 passed by Trial Court i.e. Civil Judge (J.D.), Kadipur, Sultanpur in Original Suit No.337 of 1989 (Fagoo Ram and Others Vs. Ram Laut and Others).

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the father of the appellants had filed a suit for permanent injunction and declaration of right on some part of Gata No.105 as an appurtenant land to his house, which is situated on Gata No.106, on the ground that the appellants are in possession of the land in dispute since prior to the promulgation of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act- 1950 (here-in-after referred as the Act of 1950), therefore it stands settled with them under Sec. 9 of the said Act. He further submits that an alternative plea was also taken that even if the possession of the appellants is not found since prior to promulgation of the Act of 1950, since the appellants are in possession on the land in dispute, since before 1985, therefore the same stands settled with the appellants under Sec. 123(1) of the Act of 1950. But the learned Trial Court as well as the Appellate Court have dismissed the claim of the appellants on insufficient ground and without considering the evidence adduced before the Trial Court rightly and appropriately. Learned counsel for the appellants also submits that the Appellate Court has failed to record any finding in regard to the possession of the appellants on the land in dispute and the finding recorded in regard to Sec. 123 (1) of the Act of 1950 is not tenable, therefore the appellants are before this Court.