- (1.) Heard Sri A.K. Singh learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Triveni Shankar for the respondent Nos. 4 to 8. The respondent Nos. 9 to 13 were put to notice but they have not responded.
(2.) The background of the dispute is that the respondents who were the plaintiffs in a suit under section 229-B of the U.P. Z.A. and L.R. Act, 1950 sought declaration in respect of the land in dispute. The suit came to be dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 26.8.2003. A first appeal was filed against the same that also met the same fate vide judgment of the learned Additional Commissioner, Varanasi dated 16.6.2005. Aggrieved the respondents preferred a second appeal before the Board of Revenue and the same has been allowed and the matter has been remitted to the Trial Court vide judgment and order dated 8th January, 2007.
(3.) Aggrieved the defendant-petitioner has approached this Court assailing the order of the Board of Revenue aforesaid contending that the impugned order is not in conformity with law, inasmuch as, the Board of Revenue without there being any possible or available substantial question of law has erroneously allowed the second appeal. Hence, the same deserves to be set aside.;