A.P.SAHI,J - (1.) HEARD Sri M.N.Singh learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondent nos. 1,2 and 3 and Sri Ajit Singh for the respondent no.4.
(2.) THE challenge is to the order dated 10.4.95 as upheld by the learned Commissioner in revision vide order dated 23.11.05 whereby the entries allegedly in favour of the petitioner have been expunged. The contention advanced on behalf of the petitioner is that the petitioner society is in possession of plot nos. 268M, 270M and 281M total area of 20 Bighas and 3 Biswas situate in Mauja Bingawan Pargana/Tahsil Kanpur , district Kanpur Nagar. It is submitted that the land in question was recorded in the name of the tenure holder since 1359 F and the said tenure holder executed a sale deed in favour of one Umesh Chandra Bharadwaj. The said Umesh Chandra Bharadwaj had executed a registered sale deed in favour of the petitioner society in 1966 where after the petitioner society is in continuous possession of the land in dispute.
(3.) IT is alleged that an ex-parte report had been submitted by the revenue authority behind the back of the petitioner, and the S.D.M. vide order dated 10.4.95 directed the name of the petitioner society to be expunged from the revenue record. It is further alleged that the petitioner had no knowledge about the same and after obtaining a copy of the Khatauni they preferred a revision under section 219 of the U.P.Z.A. & L. R. Act which has been dismissed.;