B. Dikshit, J. - (1.) This writ petition is directed against an order passed by Board of Revenue in exercise of second appellate jurisdiction on 9.7.1982. The short question involved in this case is that when second appellate court came to conclusion that the order passed by lower appellate court is a sketchy order, was it open for the Board of Revenue, while allowing appeal, to restore the decree passed by trial court without re-considering the whole matter itself or by sending it to lower appellate court to decide it afresh.
(2.) First appellate court is final court so far findings of facts are concerned. Admittedly, the trial court decreed the suit which was filed under Section 229-B/209 of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act by contesting opposite, party. The decree was set-aside in appeal on facts found. The Board of Revenue has held the judgment of lower appellate court as sketchy and restored the decree of trial court without examining the evidence itself.
(3.) It is argued by learned counsel that as Board of Revenue came to the conclusion that the judgment of lower appellate court was sketchy then it was obligatory for it either to have sent back the case to lower appellate court for decision afresh or it should have examined evidence itself and after re-appreciating the evidence led in the case recorded necessary finding of fact before restoring the decree of trial court.;