DAYASHANKER Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE U P ALLAHABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. U. Khan, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THIS is defendants' writ petition arising out of a suit filed by original respondents 4 to 8 Kripa Narayan and others and one Sri Prakash Rai against Ganga Mali and State of U. P. through Collector Jaunpur, Ganga Mali died during proceedings the Courts below and was survived and substituted by the original petitioners. The suit was filed under Section 202 of U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 read with Section 64 of U. P. Urban Area Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1957. In the plaint, copy of which is Annexuret to the writ petition, it was stated that prior to Zamindari abolition plaintiffs were fixed rate tenants of the property in dispute and after Zamindari abolition they became Bhumidhars. It was further pleaded that the plaintiffs had planted a guava grove in the land in dispute and defendants were sub-tenants of grove land on behalf of the plaintiffs. Suit was filed on 3. 1. 1966. Plaintiffs granted sub lease/ Patta to the defendants through registered deed dated 21. 4. 1931 registered on 1. 5. 1931, copy of which is Annexure '2' to the writ petition. In the said deed it was mentioned that property in dispute was Khudkasht of plaintiffs and it was being given to the defendants as an occupancy tenant for life (KASHTKAR DAKHILKAR HIN HIYATI ). It was also mentioned that apart from carrying on agricultural activity, lessees would not be entitled to do any thing else over the land in dispute.

(3.) THE Board of Revenue some documents were filed as additional evidence. In this writ petition it has vehemently been argued by THE learned counsel for THE petitioner that THE additional evidence, which had been taken on record by THE Board of Revenue, was not considered by it while deciding THE second appeal.