D. P. WADHWA, J. - (1.) APPELLANT is aggrieved by judgment dated 2/12/1980 of the Allahabad High Court rejecting his objections filed by him under S. 9 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (for short 'the Consolidation Act') which objections had been upheld by the authorities under that Act.
(2.) CONSOLIDATION proceedings were taken up in the village of the appellant under Ss. 8 and 8-A of the CONSOLIDATION Act. Thereafter, notices were issued inviting objections to the records so prepared. The land in question in the records was shown in the names of the respondents to which the appellant filed objections. Under S. 9-A of the CONSOLIDATION Act the CONSOLIDATION Officer by judgment dated July 12, 1972 upheld the objections of the appellant and names of the respondents were removed from the records and name of the appellant was entered as 'Sirdar.' Respondents took up the matter in appeal before the Settlement Officer (CONSOLIDATION), who dismissed the same by order dated 27/09/1992. The matter was yet further taken in revision by the respondents and by order dated 12/04/1973 Deputy Director, CONSOLIDATION dismissed the revision. Respondents thereafter filed writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution in the Allahabad High Court which by impugned judgment dated 2/12/1980 quashed the orders of all the three authorities. The result was that disputed land stood in the names of the respondents in the revenue records under the CONSOLIDATION Act. To understand the rival contentions we may briefly refer to the background of the case. The appellant claimed that he was the sole heir of his father Baldev, who was having tenancy rights in the land and after the death of his father appellant inherited the tenancy rights. Appellant said that Shivrati, who claimed to be his brother, was not in fact his brother and that when his father remarried his second wife was already having a son named Shivrati. However, in the revenue records the names of both the appellant and Shivrati were entered which entries according to the appellant were false and were being heirs of Baldev made by Patwari of the village in collusion with Shivrati. Baldev died sometime in 1945, appellant claimed he had been in exclusive possession of the land as owner irrespective of the entries in the revenue records.
(3.) IN 1959 Shivrati filed a suit for partition under S. 176 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (for short 'Zamindari Abolition Act'). The case set up by the appellant that Shivrati was not his brother was negatived and on 24/02/1961 final decree was passed for partition in favour of Shivrati. An appeal against the judgment and decree thus passed was taken by the appellant but that was dismissed by judgment dated 17/07/1961. The decree for partition became final. It is, however, admitted case of the parties that this decree was never executed and that appellant always remained in possession of the land since the death of his father which, as stated above, was some time in 1945. During the pendency of the appeal against the decree of partition, Shivrati, it would appear, deposited ten times of the land revenue and on 1/05/1961 obtained 'Bhumidari sanad' of the land in his name. Shivrati, thereafter, executed two sale deeds dated 4/05/1961 and 20/06/1961 in favour of the respondents in respect of the land of his share under the decree.;