RAJA RAM Vs. RAM BAHADUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the appellant on point of admission of second appeal and perused the record.

(2.) In Original Suit, the plaint case was that parties are joint owner and tenure holder of disputed agricultural property, and defendants be restrained from transferring this property unless they get their share partitioned. The defendants filed writtenstatement and counter-claim with averment that parties are joint tenure holders, who had entered into family arrangement and partition of the said property. Plaintiff had executed sale-deed of that portion of property which had come in share of defendant. Therefore, sale-deed executed by plaintiff no.-2 dated 22.11.2001 in favour of third persons be cancelled and plaintiffs be restrained from interfering in possession of defendants' share of this property.

(3.) After accepting the evidences of the parties and affording them opportunity of hearing, the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bareilly had dismissed the original suit as well as counter-claim by its judgment dated 26.2.2009. Against said judgment, plaintiff had not preferred any appeal, but defendant had preferred Civil Appeal No. 22 of 2009 against the order of dismissal of counterclaim. First appellate court had afforded opportunity of hearing to the parties and dismissed the said civil appeal with finding, inter alia, that suit of plaintiff as well as counter-claim is barred by provision of Sec. 331 of UPZA and LR Act and, therefore, it is barred by provision of Order- VII, Rule- 11 CPC. With these findings, Civil Appeal was dismissed. Against the judgment of dismissal of counter-claim and that of Civil Appeal, the present second appeal has been preferred by defendant of the original suit.