Jagdish Sahai J. - (1.) THE dispute between the parties in this case relates to plots Nos. 5317/1 and 5317/2 area 28 acres each, situate in village Machhli Sahar, Pergana Ghesuwa, district Jaunpur. These two plots originally constituted plot No. 5317 measuring 56 acres. Syed Abdullah was the fixed rate tenant of this plot. On 24-8-1949 he sold his half share in the aforesaid plots to Ram Khilawan, Ram Dular and Daya Ram, respondents Nos. 1 to 3. Thereafter proceedings under Section 145, Criminal P. C. were started. Those proceedings terminated in favour of Ram Khilawan. Ram Dular and Daya Ram. Thereafter, on 12th May, 1951 Naresh. father of the appellants Raghu-nath. Kedar Nath, Jai Nath and Hari Lal filed a suit against Ram Khilawan, Ram Dular. Dava Ram and Kaleem who was the landlord of the plots in dispute (he succeeded Syed Abdullah on the latter's death) under Section 183 of the U. P. Tenancy Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on the allegation, inter alia, that the plots in dispute were sub-let to him (Naresh) by Syed Abdullah, but the respondents Ram Khilawan, Ram Dular and Daya Ram, who had purchased half share of the plot from Syed Abdullah, were interfering with his (Naresh's) pos session.
(2.) ROM Khilawan, Ram Dular and Daya Ram contested the suit, inter alia, on the plea that Syed Abdullah, who was the original fixed rate tenant of the afore said plots, had sold his half share in the same to them on 24-8-1949 and had sub let the remaining half to them. It was also pleaded that Naresh had never been in possession over the land in suit. The Assistant Collector decreed the suit on 23-4-1953. Ram Khilawan, Ram Dular and Dava Ram filed an appeal against the decree passed by the learned Assistant Collector. That appeal was heard by the learned Additional Commissioner, Vara nasi, who allowed it on 22-2-1954 and dis missed the suit filed by Naresh on the ground that the revenue Court had no jurisdiction to try the suit. Naresh did not appeal against the decree passed by the learned Additional Commissioner, Varanasi but filed a suit in the Civil Court against Ram Khilawan, Ram Dular and Daya Ram for recovery of possession over the plots in dispute. The Civil Court returned the plaint on the finding that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit. Naresh then presented the plaint before the Assistant Collector, I class, Jaunpur on 6-2-1958 making it a suit under Sections 59/180/183 of the Act and sought the relief of eiectment against Ram Khilawan, Ram Dular and Daya Ram. The Assistant Collector decreed the suit on 23-9-1959. Ram Khilawan, Ram Dular and Daya Ram filed an appeal against the decree dated 23-9-1959. This appeal was heard by the Additional Com missioner, Varanasi who allowed it, set aside the decree passed by the Assistant Collector and dismissed the suit on 7-6-1960. Naresh then preferred a second ap peal before the Board of Revenue. The Board of Revenue allowed the appeal on 7-7-1965/11-4-1966 (7-7-1965 being the date of the judgment of the Member of the Board of Revenue who heard the ap peal and 11-4-1966 being the date of the order of concurrence passed by the other Member).
(3.) RAM Khilawan, Ram Dular and Daya Ram then filed Writ Petition No. 3075 of 1966 in this Court and prayed for the quashing of the order passed by the Board of Revenue and the Assistant Collector, I class, Jaunpur.;