TIKARAM Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Shiwa Kant Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Dileep Kumar Pandey, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State.

(2.) The contention of Shri Shiwa Kant Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner is that Baijnath filed a suit under Section 176/229B seeking partisan and declaration of his rights, which was dismissed. The father of the petitioner Nanhey was defendant therein. Being aggrieved Baijnath filed an Appeal under Section 331 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, which was allowed and he was declared as Sahkhatedar/ Sahsirdar with ? share in the holding in question. The decree was prepared, a copy of which is annexed as part of Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition. Neither the judgement dated 203.1971 nor the decree prepared in pursuance thereof have been denied by the opposite parties.

(3.) In pursuance to the aforesaid, entires were made in R6, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure No. 4 to the writ petition, which is also not denied by the opposite parties.