- (1.) THESE are two ap peals which have been disposed of by the lower appellate court by one and the same judgment as the same questions of law and fact arise for determination in both of them. For the same reason, both the appeals are being disposed of by me by one and the same judgment.
(2.) THE facts giving rise to these ap peals are as follows:- Admittedly, the husband of Smt. Jhuria was the tenant of the disputed plots. She inherited the tenancy of her husband. She is alleged to have admitted Someshwar as a cotenant by making an application under Section 3 of the U. P. Agricultural Tenants (Acquisition of Privileges) Act. In this application, she alleged that Someshwar who was her nephew was cotenant with her from before 23-6- 1950 and as his name was not entered over the plots, his name be en tered and the deposit under Section 3-B of the U. P. Agricultural Tenants (Acquisition of Privileges) Act be accepted. The appli cation was allowed and the name of Someshwar was entered as cotenant with Smt. Jhu ria.
(3.) SMT . Jhuria died on 26th August 1951. After her death, Someshwar filed a suit under Section 59 of the U. P. Tenancy Act against the Zamindars for a declaration that he was the sole tenant of the plots in dispute after the death of Smt. Jhuria. By a compromise, the Zamindars admitted So meshwar as tenant on 8/9th November, 1951. ' Thereafter, Someshwar sold these plots to the plaintiffs-respondents.;