MOSIM ALI Vs. GANGA PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second civil appeal has come up before this Bench for disposal. The learned single Judge before whom it came up referred it to a Full Bench in view of the conflict between two Division Bench cases of this Court, viz. Hub Lal v. Mst. Dulara, 1954 All LJ 762 and Durgapal Singh v. Kunwar Jahan Singh, (8) 1957 All 257 as according to him, the result or the appeal depends on whether one or the other of the two decisions was correct.

(2.) THE dispute relates to plots Nos. 558/1, 558/2, 565/1, 566/1, 566/2 and 567/2. The plaintiffs- respondents Nos. 1 to 5 filed a suit against the defendants-appellants with respect, among others, to these plots for possession and damages. They claimed that they were the sirdars of these plots and were in possession having obtained the same on the 19th of October, 1947, in execution of a decree in a suit for ejectment against the appellants filed in the year 1946. They claim to have been dispossessed thereafter in the year 1955 as a result of which this suit was filed. The claim of the defendants- appellants, however, was that they were the subtenants of these plots and had continued to be so all along without ever being dispossessed and as such they had become adhivasis under Section 20(a) (i) of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act and subsequently became sirdars. This plea of theirs has been negatived by the learned Civil Judge in the first appeal who held that they had been elected in the year 1947 and had not been in possession till they dispossessed the plaintiffs in the year 1955 when the latter had to file the suit giving rise to this appeal. Their case, in the alternative, however, was that by virtue of being recorded as occupants in the Khasra and Khatauni of 1356 Fasli they had acquired the status or adhivasis under Section 20(b) of the Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. Their names had in fact continued to be recorded in column No. 6 of the Khasra even though they had been ejected, and were so recorded in the year 1356 Fasli.

(3.) THE learned Single Judge rejected the first contention. Explanation III of Section 20 reads as follows: