- (1.) THIS petition is directed against the judgment of the Board of Revenue, dismissing the suit of petitioner No. 1 as not maintainable.
(2.) THE petitioner filed a suit for declaration and ejectment under Sections 229-B/209 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act on the allegation that the land in dispute was the grove of the plaintiff. The defendant No. 1 used to purchase its fruits. He, in collusion with the Lekhpal, got his name wrongly recorded over the grove and was trying to interfere with the plaintiff's possession. It was prayed that the plaintiff be declared to be the bhumidhar in possession and, in the alternative, if the defendant be found to be in possession, he should be evicted. In defence it was pleaded that the plaintiff was not a legal person. It was not the bhumidhar. The land in dispute was not a grove. The land was given by the zamindar to the defendant's brother, Vishwanath, and it was Viswanath who had planted the grove. As a result of a private partition in the family the grove fell to the defendant's share. It was also pleaded that the suit was barred by limitation.
(3.) THE trial court repelled the various pleas in bar and decreed the suit. This decree was upheld in appeal. Aggrieved, the defendant went up to the Board of Revenue in second appeal.;