GARIBA Vs. JANI & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision preferred against the judgment and order dated March 1, 1996 passed by the learned Additional Commissioner, Moradabad Division, Moradabad arising out of an order dated 16-11 -1992 passed by the learned Trial Court in the proceeding initiated under Section 198(4) of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act.

(2.) BRIEF and relevant facts of the ease arc that an application dated 17-4-1990 was moved on behalf of the applicant-revisionist Gariba under Section 198(4), of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act with the prayer that the name of the O.Ps Jani 7 others be expunged from the revenue papers and the applicant-revisionist be declared the Bhumidhar under Section 122-B(4-F) of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, over the disputed holding as detailed at the foot of the plaint. The learned trial Court after completing the requisite trial has withdrawn the notice issued to the O.Ps and also dropped the proceedings in the instant case on 16-11-1992. Aggrieved by this order a revision was preferred. The learned Additional Commissioner has also dismissed the revision. Hence this second revision.

(3.) I have carefully and closely con­sidered the contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the parties and have also gone through the relevant records on file. A closed perusal of the records reveals that the learned lower Revisional Court has properly and lysed, considered and dis­cussed the relevant points at issue and has recorded clear and categorical finding to the effect that the aforesaid application moved by the applicant-revisionist was highly time barred and show-cause notice issued against the O.Ps. in the instant mat­ter was also time barred. On examination of the relevant records it is a manifestly clear that the instant proceedings were initiated upon the afore said application moved on behalf of the applicant-revisionist Gariba. The learned Addition­al Commissioner has properly examined the points at issue in the instant case and drawn correct conclusion. I entirely agree with the aforesaid conclusion. I find no any error of law. fact or jurisdiction so as to warrant any interference in the aforesaid impugned order passed by the learned Ad­ditional Commissioner.