SHEO RAJ BAHADUR MATHUR Vs. AMBA PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHRI Sheo Raj Bahadur Mathur, Vakil of the court was appointed receiver in a case. After his having been appointed receiver he filed several suits for recovery of rent. A preliminary objection was raised by the Defendants that since the Plaintiff had not made a report as contemplated by Section 34 of the UP Land Revenue Act he could not maintain the suit by virtue of Section 34 of the UP Land Revenue Act and on this preliminary ground the suit was dismissed by the trial court.

(2.) ON appeal this decision of the trial court was upheld. The present appeal along with five connected appeals have been filed in this Court and the only point for determination in the circumstances of the present case is whether Section 34 of the UP Land Revenue Act is applicable to the case Section 34 of the UP Land Revenue Act lays down that: