C.L.VERMA, j. - (1.) THIS second appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 7-4-95 passed by learned Additional Commissioner, Jhansi in Ap­peal No. 10/19 of 1993-94 district Hamir-pur arising out of a suit under Section 229-B of the UPZA and LR Act.
(2.) BY the impugned order the learned Additional Commissioner allowed the ap­peal, set aside the judgment and decree dated 14-12-93/20-12-93 passed by the trial Court and dismissed the suit of the plaintiff. Briefly the facts of the case are that Marwa since deceased (substituted by Durga) and two others instituted a suit against Smt. Mahrania and others. They pleaded that the land in question was an­cestral properly and came down from the time of Isuriya, that Isuriya had two sons Ganguwa and Mahangua, that Gangu's son was Aman who left his son Pachuwa and Nathua was the son of Pachuwa ; that Smt. Maharaniya's son was Pusuwa and the plaintiffs are the sons of Pusuwa, that the property in question was recorded in the name of the ancestors of the parties ; and that Nathua remained unmarried through out his life that one Smt. Maliya alias Bholiya widow of Girdhariya started living with him as Girdhariya has died ; that Smt. Maharaniya was the daughter of Moliya alias Bholiya with Girdhariya and came to live with Nathuwa along with her mother Smt. Moliya, that on the death of Nathuwa the name of Smt. Maharaniya was wrongly entered as daughter of Nathuwa, that taking advantage of the entry in her name she sold the land to others ; that there after the plaintiffs came to know about the wrong entry and hence the present suit. The defendants contested the suit on the ground that Smt. Maharaniya was the daughter of Nathuwa and Moliya alias Bholiya and that the present suit was barred by Section 49 of the UPCH Act. According to the defence, the name of Smt. Maharaniya had been mutated on the death of Nathuwa much before the commencement of the con­solidation proceedings and hence non-filing of the objection by the other side was material and the present suit is barred by Section 49 of the UPCH Act. The trial Court decreed the. suit. On appeal the learned Additional Commissioner al­lowed the appeal and dismissed the suit. Feeling aggrieved by this order Durga has filed the present second appeal.
(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.;