Dinesh Gupta, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties on Civil Misc. Abatement Application No. 155798 of 2014. Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the disputed land is an agricultural land situated in area, which is under consolidation operation. The parties of the aforesaid second appeal are participating in the proceedings before consolidation Court by filing their objections. The consolidation officer vide order dated 23.8.2011 has decided the case of the parties. Copy of order passed by consolidation officer is annexed to this affidavit. Against the said order, the appeal is pending before the settlement officer of consolidation. Hence, it is in the interest of justice that the Court be pleased to abate the proceedings of aforesaid second appeal under section 5 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953.
(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the respondents submitted that admittedly the area in which the disputed land situated, which is under the consolidation proceeding and in case, the Court come to the conclusion that the consolidation proceedings are pending and the proceedings are likely to be abated and the whole proceedings including the suit or first appeal deserves to be abated. In support of his contentions, the learned Counsel for the respondents has relied upon certain case laws, which are as under: 1. Sheo Achal Mishra v. Ram Bali Mishra : 1971 R.D. 339. 2. Kamta Singh and others v. Ganesh Prasad Dube, 1961 R.D. 261. 3. Jagarnath Shukla v. Sita Ram and others, 1969 R.D. 429.
(3.) DARBARI Lal and others v. Chokhey Lal and others : 1968 R.D. 77. 4. Admittedly, the disputed land situated in the area, which is under consolidation operation. After the issuance of notification under section 4 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, section 5 of the said Act provides the effect of said notification.;