(1.) This is a Defendant's second appeal arising out of a suit for a declaration that the Plaintiffs were the owners in possession of a pond and a number of trees standing therein or on the boundary line thereof. The Defendants to the suit were the Gaon Samaj of the village concerned, the State of Uttar Pradesh and the Defendant -Appellant Tilakdhari Singh. Plaintiffs Set forward the case that the pond in suit had been dug by their ancestors and the trees had also been planted by their ancestors and that both the pond as well as the trees had been in Plaintiffs' possession and before them, their ancestors, since a very long time with the result that the Plaintiffs were the owners of the pond and the trees, but that, on account of certain incorrect entries in the revenue records, they were driven to the necessity of filing the suit.
(2.) The State of Uttar Pradesh did not appear to contest the claim. As far the Gaon Samaj is concerned, two written statements were filed. The first was under the signature of one Ambika Prasad who described himself as President. By this written statement Plaintiffs' claim of ownership in the pond was denied, but Plaintiffs' case and claim as regards the trees were admitted. Subsequently, another written statement was filed under the signature of one Mathura Prasad whereunder the entire claim set forward by the Plaintiffs was denied. The Appellant Tilakdhari Singh filed a separate written statement in which he took up pleas similar to those taken on behalf of the Gaon Samaj in the latter written statement filed under the signature of Mathura Prasad.
(3.) The trial court recorded the finding that the pond was the property of the Maharaja of Banaras and after the abolition of Zamindari, the tank had vested in the State of Uttar Pradesh and the Gaon Samaj concerned was in possession thereof. As regards the trees also, the learned Munsif recorded the finding that the Plaintiffs were not the owners of the trees either. The suit was, therefore, dismissed by the learned Munsif.