R. B. Misra, J. - (1.) THE present review application is directed against the order of D. D. Seth, J. (as he then was) dated 27th August, 1976.
(2.) IT appears that Sakal Singh and five others filed a suit for declaration that they were either the bhumidhars or sirdars of the disputed plots against the applicants, Smt. Devi and Smt. Dharma, the suit was contested by the applicants on the ground that they were the bhumidhars in possession. The trial Court as well as the lower appellate court dismissed the suit. The plaintiffs, therefore, filed a second appeal before this Court, which was allowed by a learned Single Judge of this Court by his order dated 4th August, 1967. Smt, Devi and Smt. Dharma, the applicants, later on, filed the present review application on 23rd August, 1967. The review application came up for admission before the same learned Judge on 24th October, 1967, who directed for the issue of notice. During the pendency of the review application, the village where the plots in dispute are situate was brought under consolidation operation in pursuance of a notification under Section 4 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) the applicants moved an application on 5th August 1976, for abating the suit and the appeal under Section 5(2) of the Act. As the learned Judge, who decided the second appeal, ceased to be a member of the Court, the application for review came up for final disposal before a Bunch of two Judges, as required under the Rules. Learned counsel for the applicants pressed the application for abatement of the suit and the appeal under Section 5(2) of the Act and in support of his contention, placed reliance on Smt. Raj Dei v. Ram Pal 1974 All LJ 518. In that case, it was held that once a review application has been admitted and a rule has been issued, the Court is seized of the matter in dispute and the proceedings in the second appeal are revived. On the strength of this authority, it was contended that the suit is pending in the form of a second appeal and the same may be abated in view of Section 5(2) of the Act. The Bench hearing the review application, however doubted the correctness of the proposition laid down in Smt. Raj Dei v. Ram Pal (supra). The Bench, therefore, refer red the following question for answer by a larger Bench :- "Does a mere admission of a review application and issue of a rule therein disturb the finality of the judgement in a suit or appeal and reopen and revive that suit or appeal ?" This is how the matter has come up before this Bench. In order to appreciate the question referred, it will be relevant, of this stage, to refer to Section 5 of the Act so far as it is material for the case. It reads : "5. Effect of notification under Section 4(2) - (1) Upon the publication of the notification under Sub- Section (2) of Section 4 in the Official Gazette, the consequences, as hereinafter set forth, shall subject to the provisions of this Act, from the date specified thereunder till the publication of notification under Section 52 or Sub-Section (1) of Section 6, as the case may be, ensue in the area to which the notification under Sub-Section (2) of Section 4 relates, namely- (a) to (c) ............ (2) Upon the said publication of the notification under Sub-Section (2) of Section 4, the following further consequences shall ensue in the area to which the notification relates, namely,- (a) Every proceeding for the correction of records and every suit and proceeding in respect of declaration of rights or interest in any land lying in the area, or for declaration or adjudication of any other right in regard to which proceedings can or ought to be taken under this Act, pending before any court or authority whether of the first instance or of appeal, reference or revision, shall, on the order being passed in that behalf by the court or authority before whom such suit or proceeding is pending, stand abated : ............... ................ (b) Such abatement shall be without prejudice to the rights of the persons affected to agitate the right or interest in dispute in the said suits or proceedings before the appropriate consolidation authorities under and in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the rules made thereunder."
(3.) FROM the scheme of the appears that suits or proceeding for declaration of rights or interest pending in any Court would be abated the parties would get fresh opportunity of getting their rights adjudicated by the consolidation authorities. Section 5(2)(a) of the Act contemplates various kinds of proceedings pending before any Court or authority whether of the first instance or of appeal, reference or revision to be abated. They are : (i) Proceedings for correction records : (ii) every suit in respect of declaration of rights or interest in any land or for declaration or adjudication of any other right; and, (iii) Proceedings in respect of declaration of rights or interest in any land.;