- (1.) This is a petition Under Article 221 of the Constitution.
(2.) The petitioner was the Plaintiff in a suit which she filed against the Respondent for their ejectment Under Section 80 of the U.P. Tenancy Act. She was herself a tenant and she alleged that the Respondents had taken possession without her consent and were trespassers. The suit was decreed by the trial court. The Respondents appealed. During the pendency of the appeal execution proceedings were taken out and the Appellant was put in possession of the holding on February 6, 1953. Against these execution proceedings there was an appeal Under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure. This execution appeal and the appeal from the original decree both came up together for hearing before the Assistant Commissioner. The execution appeal was allowed and consequently the Respondents withdrew their appeal from the original decree. Both these things happened on the 8th of September, 1953.
(3.) The Petitioner then filed a revision before the Board of Revenue which dismissed the same on the 30th August 1955. A review application was also dismissed. The Petitioner has now come to this Court and the point urged before us is that the ground upon which the appeal was allowed by the Assistant Commissioner and the revision was dismissed by the Board of Revenue was untenable. The ground on which the Assistant Commissioner allowed the appeal was that as the execution proceedings were pending when the Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act came into force and Under Rule 4(2) the execution proceedings were to be stayed, the execution proceedings could not have been completed in favour of the Petitioner and the Respondents were entitled to get back possession.;