RAM CHANDRA Vs. BHADDI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri A.D. Singh learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri C.B. Singh learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Respondent No. 3 is a proforma respondent. Mst. Mahrin was the original tenure-holder of property in dispute who is said to have died in the year 1982. In due course of time names of the petitioner and respondent No. 3 who are the real brothers came to be recorded in the revenue record i.e. in Khatauni in terms of the order dated 10.4.2000 as is evident from the Khatauni pertaining to the years 1403-F to 1408-E

(2.) The petitioner and respondent No. 3 came to know about a sale-deed said to have been executed by Mst. Mahrin i.e. their mother in some proceedings which are unrelated to the present dispute. Soon after it was known to the petitioner that a fake sale-deed dated 18/21.3.1983 said to be executed by Mst. Mahrin was relied upon in some bail proceedings, they filed a suit for cancellation of sale-deed before the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Fatehpur in original Suit No. 527 of 2000. After filing of civil suit before the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) Fatehpur, as many as six issues came to be framed upon exchange of pleadings between the petitioner and respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

(3.) The issues framed by the Trial Court included the issue as to the maintainability of suit, which was framed as Issue No. 5. According to the learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 the said issue was initially decided in favour of the petitioner which gave rise to Civil Revision No. 20 of 2007.The civil revision was decided by the Court below on, 26.9.2007 and the matter was relegated to the Trial Court for being decided afresh. In pursuance of the revisional Court order dated 26.9.2007 issue No. 5 which related as to the maintainability of civil suit and in respect of which bar of section 331 of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 was pleaded before the Trial Court came, to be decided by the Trial Court on 18.7.2009 whereby, the civil suit filed by the petitioner was held to be non-maintainable. In this manner issue No. 5 was decided against the petitioner. A Misc. Appeal against the order/judgment dated 18.7.2009 was filed before the Court of Addl. District & Session Judge, Court No. 8, Fatehpur which, was registered as Misc Appeal No. 12 of 1991. The Court below decided the Misc. Appeal by means of order/judgment dated 25.2.2012 and order passed, by tire Trial Court on 18.7.2009 was upheld.