SUKHBASI AND ANOTHER Vs. RAM CHARAN AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition arises out of consolidation proceedings. The parties had properties in two villages, namely, Dharkan and Adhara in the district of Etawah. The consolidation proceedings having commenced in respect of the holding in village Dharkan, the Petitioners' father Tulsi filed objections. The title of the parties which was thus in issue, was by an agreement of the parties referred to arbitration by the Consolidation Officer on 27 -11 -1963. The Arbitrators gave an award on 30 -11 -1963 and the interested parties accepted the award and signed it. The award was filed before the Consolidation Officer, who also accepted it and declared the parties' share in the holding in that village in accordance with it. This order was passed on 30 -11 -1963.

(2.) SUBSEQUENTLY consolidation operations commenced in the other village Adhara. Objections, as to title were raised in respect of the holding in this village. The Consolidation Officer decided them without following the award given in the previous case. Revisions were filed, but the Dy. Director of Consolidation by his order dated 15 -11 -1965 held that the award will not be binding between the parties, because the consolidation officer had no jurisdiction to refer the dispute as to title to arbitration. He, therefore, held that the declaration of shares by the Consolidation Officer could not be interfered with.

(3.) IN the present petition it has, inter alia, been urged by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioners that the award having been consented to and acted upon by the parties before the Consolidation Officer when the previous order was passed on 30 -11 -1963 it would operate and will be binding on the parties as an agreement between them which had been acted upon. A decree obtained on the basis of such an agreement would also operate as res judicata in subsequent litigation between the parties relating to the same source of title. In my opinion, both the submissions are sound.