PARSA RAM Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH the matter is posted for final orders on the stay application but, with the consent and at the request of the learned counsel for the parties and having regard to the issues involved, we have heard this appeal at this stage itself.

(2.) PUT in brief, the relevant aspects of the matter remain that the plaintiff -appellant filed a suit for partition, as also for declaration of right, in relation to the agricultural land in question that had earlier been recorded in the name of his grand father. The defendants filed the written statement and also took a counter claim seeking declaration of their khatedari rights over a part of the land in question. Seven issues were framed by the learned Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Bhadra ('the SDO') and the parties led their evidence. Ultimately, the learned SDO proceeded to decree the suit in favour of the plaintiff by the judgment and decree dated 26.06.2003.

(3.) HOWEVER , it was submitted by the defendant in further appeal before the Board of Revenue that the issues had not been decided as per the requirements of the Order XX Rule 5 CPC; and the learned Revenue Appellate Authority too did not carry out the requisite compliance of the requirements of law.