Ramesh Chandra vs Tej Pal Garg

S.R. Yadav, Member.

This second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 2111993 passed by the learned Additional Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut in an appeal No. .52 of 199192, arising out of judgment and decree dated 2261992 passed by the trial Court in a suit under Section 209 of U. PZ.A. & L.R. Act.

Briefly stated the facts of the case are that one Tejpal Singh s/o Lala Yadram, originally instituted a suit under Section 209 of U.P.Z. A. & L.R. Act in respect of the plot No. 2577/1 for the ejectment of one Tejpal s/o Lala Mohan Lal. The plaintiff, Tejpal s/o Lala Yadram claimed his right over the disputed land on the basis of auction sale by the custodian on 13/161168. The suit was instituted because Tejpal s/o Lala Mohan Lal occupied the disputed land by force. The suit was instituted before the SubDivisional Officer, Khurja, Bulandshahar which was allowed vide the order dated 31121984 and on being challenged, the order dated 31.121984 was set aside and the whole matter was remanded to the trial Court, vide the order dated 2631985 with certain directions for demarcation of the land by the Advocated Commissioner. Later on, the suit was transferred to the Court of ASDO, Khurja, for disposal according to law who after taking evidence and framing 10 issues in the matter passed the order on 2261992 and decree dated 471992. The above orders were challenged before the Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut which has been heard and decided vide the Additional Commissioner''s order dated 2111993 whereby the matter again remanded to the trial Court for decision and declaration under Section 143 of U.P.Z.A. &L.R. Act. Aggrieved by the above order, now the appellant has come up before this Court in second appeal.

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have also gone through the relevant papers on file.

The learned Counsel for the appellant mainly submitted that the order of the lower appellate Court was sketchy and nonspeaking without discussing the points involved in the matter and that the lower appellate Court has not applied its mind; hence the order of the lower appellate Court should be set aside.

In reply, the learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that the land was Abadi; hence the same should be referred to the SDO for declaration under Section 143 of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act. In support of his contentions he has cited the case law reported in 1987 RD 231.

After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and perusing the records it is crystal clear that the land in dispute was acquired from the custodian in 1968. Tejpal s/o Lala Mohan Lal, claimed his right prior to 1968 and has pleaded that he was in possession over the same and the same was in the knowledge of Tejpal s/o Ljala Yadram; Tejpal s/o Lala Yadram has been substituted by his sons Rarnesh Chandra and Puran Chandra, after his death. The order of the trial Court dated 2761992 is detailed one while the order of the lower appellate Court dated 2111993'' is sketchy, cryptic and is also nonspeaking; while passing the order dated 2111993 the lower appellate Court i.e. the learned Additional Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut has not applied his mind and has not considered the points involved in the matter. He has also not reversed the each and every findings recorded by the trial Court. In this regard I agree with the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the appellant. The submissions advanced on behalf of the respondents no force and the caselaw referred to by him is also not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the instant case.

The lower appellate Court has not indicated as to what irregularity and perversity have been committed in the order dated'' 2261992 passed by the ASDO, Khurja, Bulandshahar.

In the circumstances the matter should be sent back to the lower appellate Court for hearing and decision after analysing and considering the points involved in the matter.

In the result, the second appeal is hereby allowed and the order dated 211 1993 passed by the learned Additional Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut is hereby set aside and the whole matter is remanded to the lower appellate Court for afresh hearing after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned according to law and the observations made herein above.