K. P. Singh, J - (1.) :-
(2.) THIS writ petition is against the judgment of Sri Balwant Ram, Deputy Director of Consolidation, Ghazipur dated 7-7-1973 whereby the revision petition filed by the petitioner was also dismissed. The only point involved in the present writ .petition is whether the petitioner is son of Usman and entitled to the property belonging to Usman. The Consolidation Officer accepted the claim of the petitioner through his judgment dated 6-6-1972, but the appellate court and the revisional court have negatived the claim of the petitioner. Thereafter the petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends before me that the appellate authority and the revisional court have failed to consider the documentary evidence with the result that their finding stands vitiated in law and deserves to be quashed. Secondly he contends that the petitioner being co-tenure-holder is entitled to the disputed property on the principle of survivorship under section 175 of U. P. Z. A. and L. R. Act.
(3.) I have examined the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner. In my opinion the finding of fact recorded by the appellate court and confirmed by the revisional court to the effect that the petitioner is not the son of Usman is a pure finding of fact whereas the document referred to by the petitioner appears to have been considered by the appellate court and the revisional court. The only document emphasised by the learned counsel for the petitioner having not been considered by the two authorities is the mutation application in which the name of the petitioner was shown as son of Usman.;