JAGAN BEDIYA Vs. KAMESHWAR NARAYAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) By the impugned order of the learned Single Judge, the rejection of the land restoration application of the appellants under Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act 1908 has been upheld.

(3.) Out of the 8 appellants of this appeal, appellant Nos. 1 to 4 are sons of one Rahni Devi who had filed an earlier land restoration application under the same provisions of the Act in the year 1977. The order passed on that restoration application has been annexed with this appeal as Annexure No. 4. On internal page 2 of that annexure it has been clearly stated that the claim of Smt. Rabni Devi on one part of the land on which restoration was sought, was not valid, meaning thereby that the restoration application was rejected in respect of that part of the land. Subsequently, after a lapse of about 10 years, a second application for restoration was filed by Smt. Rabni Devi which was also rejected. The third application which is relevant for this case was filed by the said four sons of Smt. Rabni Devi i.e. appellant Nos. 1 to 4 along with the appellant Nos. 5 to 8 who allege themselves to be co-sharers of Smt. Rabni Devi.