RAMESHWAR DAYAL Vs. JUMMA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Bharat Singh, learned counsel for the applicant-respondent and Sri Anil Kumar Aditya, learned counsel respondent-appellant.

(2.) This second appeal was abated under an order of this Court dated 25th November, 2009 because the Court was informed that notification under Section 4 of the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1953) had been issued and as a consequence to the provisions of Section 4 (2) of Act, proceedings shall be abated.

(3.) An application for recall of the said order has been filed on behalf of the plaintiff respondent in the present appeal on the ground that on the date the order of abatement was made by this Court notification under Section 52 of the Act, 1953 for close of the consolidation operations, had already been issued. Therefore, the order abating the proceedings is not justified. Reference is made to the judgment of this Court in the case of Ram Charittar Singh vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Azamgarh & Others, 1992 RevDec 100 for the proposition that there is no automatic abatement of the proceedings because of notification under Section 4 (2) and an order in that regard has necessarily to be made after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned by the concerned Court.