Prakash Krishna, J. - (1.) RAISING a short controversy relating to the applicability of the principles of res judicata, the present writ petition has been filed against the judgment and order dated 2nd of November, 1988 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bareilly in revision no. 12/87 -88 whereby he has allowed the revision and has held that out of the two petitioners herein each is entitled 1/8th share i.e. total 1/4th share in the property in dispute and remaining 3/4th share belongs to the contesting respondents herein. The facts of the case are not much in dispute and are being noted in brief.
(2.) BEFORE the commencement of the consolidation operation in the village there was a litigation under section 176 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act between the parties for partition. It was suit no. 196/78: Rasheed Ahmed and others v. Wali Mohammed and others. The said suit was decreed on 31st of August, 1978 by passing a preliminary decree holding that the plaintiffs Rasheed Ahmed and others have 1/4th share and the remaining 3/4th share belongs to the defendants therein. Before the final decree could be passed the village was notified under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act for consolidation purposes. During the course of consolidation proceedings, a dispute arose between the parties with respect to the extent of their share in respect of two Khata Nos. 156 at village Kalari and 84 of village Lalpur. Rasheed Ahmed and Maznoo sons of Iddoo (petitioners) claimed half share in the aforesaid two Khatas. The claim of the petitioners was denied by the respondents herein on the ground that they are entitled to 1/4th share. There is a small pedigree. Buddhi is the common ancestor who had two sons namely Maula Bux and Iddoo. The petitioners are sons of Iddoo and the contesting respondents are sons of Maula Bux. The Consolidation Officer by his judgement and order dated 4th of August, 1986 held that the petitioners herein have 1/4th share in all. The matter was carried in appeal Nos.573 and 1273 before the Settlement Officer of Consolidation who allowed the appeals by a common judgment dated 21st of August, 1987 holding that the petitioners herein have half share in the aforesaid two Khatas.
(3.) THE matter was carried further in revision no. 12/87 -88 before the Deputy Director of Consolidation, who by the impugned order, allowed the revision and restored the order of the Consolidation Officer.;