- (1.) Heard Sri Krishna Mohan, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri Rudheshwari Prasad appearing for contesting respondents.
(2.) Facts, giving rise to the dispute, are as under. Suit filed by respondent no. 3 under Section 229-B of U. P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act, being suit no. 143 of 1974, seeking declaration of Bhumidhari rights over the plots in dispute was decreed by the trial court vide judgment and order dated 29.3.1975 on the basis of alleged compromise between the parties. Having obtained knowledge of the said decree, an application was filed by petitioner for setting aside the same on the ground that no notice or summons was ever issued or served upon him and he never entered into compromise and the compromise filed in the proceedings was fraudulent and decree has been obtained by fraud. Sub Divisional Officer, Ballia vide order dated 5.7.1976 allowed the application and set aside the decree which was challenged in revision. Additional Commissioner, Varanasi Division, Varanasi vide order dated 10.3.1977 prepared a reference and forwarded to the Board of Revenue with recommendation for allowing the revision on the ground that Sub Divisional Officer, Ballia had recalled the compromise decree without calling for an expert report to verify the genuineness of the alleged thumb impression on the compromise. Board of Revenue by the impugned order dated 9.12.1980 accepted the reference and allowed the revision and remanded the case back to the trial court to obtain an expert report on the genuineness of the thumb impression of petitioner on the compromise and thereafter decide the restoration application. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner has approached this Court.
(3.) It has been urged by learned counsel for the petitioner that there was hardly any necessity to remand the case back for expert evidence in as much as compromise was illegal and was liable to be set aside on the ground that Gaon Sabha and State which are necessary part in the suit under Section 229-B of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act were not signatory to the compromise.;