Mootham, C.J. - (1.) This is a petition u/Art. 226 of the Constitution in which the Petitioners challenge the validity of an order of the Board of Revenue dated 27-10-1956.
(2.) The relevant facts can be stated very shortly. On 5-7-1948 the Petitioners were declared to be sub-tenants of four plots of land by an order made under the proviso to sub-section(3) of section 27 of the UP Tenancy (Amendment) Act, 1947, and they were therefore not liable to be ejected from those plots for a period of three years. On 24-9-1952, a suit was brought by Trilok, since deceased, the father of Respondents Nos. 2 and 3, and by Respondents 4 and 5 against the Petitioners for their ejectment from the four plots in suit. This suit was filed Under Section 202, Cl. (b), of the UP ZA and LR Act, 1950, on the ground that the Petitioners were asamis and were liable to ejectment. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on the ground that it was filed after the expiry of the period of limitation for such suits and this order was upheld by the Additional Commissioner in appeal. The Respondent then filed a second appeal before the Board of Revenue which by its order dated 27-10-1956, allowed the appeal, set aside the orders of the two lower courts and remanded the suit to the trial court for hearing. It is now argued that the order of the Board in which it held the suit to have been filed within the prescribed period is wrong in law and should be quashed.
(3.) R. 338 of the ZA and LR Rules, 1952, provides that all suits, applications and other proceedings specified in Appendix III there-to shall be instituted within the time specified therein, and item No. 25 (ii) in that Appendix as it stood on 24-9-1952, read thus. JUDGEMENT_25_LAWS(ALL)4_1958.html;