S.P.PANDEY, J. - (1.) THIS is recall application supported by an affidavit dated 16-3-1999 alongwith an application for condoning the delay caused in filing the aforesaid recall application with a view to recall the order dated 8-2-1992 passed by Board in second appeal No. 40 of 1989-90/Bijnor and to abate the appeal alongwith the suit under the provisions of Section 5(2) (a) of the U.P.C.H. Act.
(2.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the applicant. None appeared on be­half of the opposite-parties despite due notice. The learned counsel for the ap­plicant submitted that second appeal No. 40 of 1989-90/Bijnor has been decided on merits by the Board on 8-2-1992 while village Dariyapur where the land in dis­pute lies, was notified under Section 4-A(2) of the U.P.H.C Act. On 5-9-1991 and since then the consolidation proceedings are going on in the aforesaid village as such the aforesaid order dated 8-9-1992 is total­ly out of jurisdiction and the appeal alongwith the suit was liable to be abated, that due to the lack of the knowledge the aforesaid fact could not be brought to the notice of the Court as such the aforesaid judgment and order of the Board dated 8-9-1992 be recalled and the appeal alongwith suit be abated under the provisions of Section 5(2)(a), of the U.P.C.H. Act; that there is no delay in filing the instant recall application as immedi­ately after the receipt of the required infor­mation about the aforesaid facts the recall application was submitted as such the delay caused in filing the aforesaid applica­tion be condoned. In support of his con­tentions he has cited case-laws reported in R.D. 1972 page 54(B.R.), R.D. 80, page 4(B.R.), 1993 R.D. page 28(D.B.B.R.), R.D.(H) 1994 page 29(Alld H.C.), R.D. 1987 page 62(Alld H.C.), R.D. 1983 page 242(AlldH.C.), R.D. 1980 page 95(B.R.).
(3.) I have closely and carefully con­sidered the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the applicant and have also perused the relevant papers on file.;