BADAL AND ANOTHER Vs. KHADIM HUSSAIN AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Defendants' second appeal arising out of a suit for injunction with an alternative prayer for possession.

(2.) It is unnecessary to enter into the facts of the case since the point that has been urged before me in second appeal is a very short one and that relates to the question of limitation. The suit was filed under Sec. 14 read with Sec. 209 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act on 5th April, 1955. Among other grounds it was contested on the plea that the claim was barred by limitation. The trial court found the issue on the question of limitation in favour of the Plaintiff but dismissed the suit on the basis of finding on other issues which it recorded against the Plaintiff. The first appellate court, on appeal by the Plaintiff, came to a contrary conclusion on issues other than that relating to the question of limitation and decreed the claim without recording any specific finding on the plea of limitation. Hence the Defendants have come up in second appeal.

(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties at some length. It is not in dispute that under Appendix III to Rule 338 of the Rules under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, as it then stood, this suit should have been filed within two years The dispute centers round the question as to with effect from what date the aforesaid period of two years is to be computed. The contention of the Appellants' learned Counsel is that it i; to be computed with effect from the date of vesting, namely, 1st July, 1952 whereas the contention of the other side is that it is to be computed with effect from 1st of July following the date of serial No. 30 in Appendix II referred to above. For the sake of convenience it may be reproduced below: