RAM CHARAN Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition arises out of a suit instituted by the Petitioner under Section 229 -B/209 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act (here -in -after referred to as the Act) seeking a declaration that he was the sirdar of the land in dispute and for recovery of the possession over the same. The case set up by the Plaintiff was that his father acquired sirdari rights in the plots in dispute as he was the recorded occupant in 1356 -F. and was also in cultivatory possession in 1359 -F.; that the Plaintiff continued to remain in possession as sirdar after the death of his father on 22 -9 -1957. It was alleged that subsequently the Defendant fraudulently got the name of the Plaintiff's father expunged in proceedings under Section 137 of the Act of which the Plaintiff had no knowledge and hence the suit.

(2.) THE suit was contested by Defendant No. 1, inter alia, on the ground that the Plaintiff's father was neither a sirdar nor was ever in possession over the land; that the suit was barred under Section 34(5) of the U.P. Land Revenue Act. It was also pleaded that the proceedings under Section 240 -G of the Act were binding on the Plaintiff and the present suit was barred by principles of res judicata. Plea of limitation was also raised. It was further pleaded that by depositing ten times rent Murakh Singh acquired bhuraidhari rights and executed a sale deed in favour of the other Defendants who obtained possession over the land in question. Other Defendants pleaded that they were bona fide purchasers of the land in dispute.

(3.) THE Board of Revenue held the suit to be barred under Section 34(5). It also held that the proceeding under Section 240 -G was binding on the heirs of Bhagirathi. The Board approved the findings recorded by the lower appellate court that Bhagirathi was not dead on 22 -9 -1957 on the ground that it was based on appreciation of evidence and could not be interfered with.