BALDEO SINGH Vs. SUKKA SINCE DEAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel representing the contesting respondents.

(2.) Perused the record.

(3.) Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 30-6-1980, passed by the Board of Revenue, the respondent No. 2, whereunder restoring the order passed by the Collector, - Vidisha dated 11-9-1984, directing for the reversion of the agricultural holdings in dispute in favour of the original tenure-holder, and requiring for recording his name as bhumiswami in the revenue records, and for his being put in possession thereof, the petitioner has now approached this Court seeking redress praying for the reversal of the impugned order.