BATUK PRASAD Vs. BUDDHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) D. S. Sinha, J. Heard Shri S. K. Chaubey, learned counsel appearing for Shri Lalmani Tewari, son of Shri Anant Prasad, the deceased petitioner No. 2. at great length and in detail. Shir A. S. Kapoor, learned counsel representing the respon dents, has also been heard. .

(2.) THE circumstances of the case render it imperative to go into details of the undisputed sequence of events which are as under : Cause of action for the writ petition wherein this application has been moved arose out of the proceedings under Section 9 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953. THE writ petition was instituted in this court in July, 1985 through Shri D. V. Jaiswal, Advocate. Alongwith Shri D. V Jaiswal, Shri K. M. Dayal, learned Senior Advocate of this court also appeared in the petition. THE petition was ad mitted on 15lh July, 1985. After a lapse of the long period of about eight years, an application dated 14th October, 1993 was moved on behalf of the petitioners sug gesting the dismissal of the petition as abated in view of the fact that the village wherein the property in dispute was situated had been denotified bringing an end to the consolidation proceedings.

(3.) ON 19th April, 1995 Shri R. M. Pandey, brief holder of Shri V. B. L. Srivas-tava, appeared and obtained a week's time to file requisite affidavit in support of the review application.