Janardan Sahai, J. - (1.) A suit under section 229-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act was filed by Kamla Das respondent No. 5. His case is that the land in dispute was the bumidhari of his guru Jamuna Das and on the death of Jamuna Das he succeeded to the land in dispute. The petitioners denied the title of Jamuna Das. According to the petitioners the consolidation proceedings had taken place in the village and the land was recorded in the name of Vishwanath and the petitioners have purchased the plot in dispute from Vishwanath. Both the parties claimed to be in possession.
(2.) The Trial Court and the First Appellate Court held that the suit is barred under the provisions of section 49 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act. The plaintiffs contention that the bar of section of 'the Act was not applicable because the plaintiff was a minor during consolidation proceedings was turned down with the finding that he was not able to establish 'the was a minor. Other issues regard-title of Jamuna Das or of the plaintiff were not decided. The Board of Revenue interfered with the said finding and has found that the land in dispute was recorded- in the name of Jamuna Das in 1345 Fasli, 1356 Fasli and 1362 Fasli and the plaintiff Kamla Das was his chela and he inherited the property in dispute.
(3.) It is submitted by the petitioner's Counsel that the Board of Revenue has erred in interfering with the findings recorded by both the Courts below and has not framed any substantial question of law. In support of his contention he has placed reliance upon decision of this Court in Thakur Ram Chandra Ji Maharaj v. Board of Revenue and others, 2007 (102) RD 1, Writ Petition No. 35795 of 1991 decided on 10.11.2006.;