CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(1975) 01 AHC CK 0038

Shyamraj and Others vs Raj Bali

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 3 January 1975 · Citation: (1975) AWC 22

HON’BLE JUDGES
Chandra Prakash, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Rev. No. 1223 of 1971

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 340 words

Chandra Prakash, J.—This is an application in revision against the order dated 3-8-1971 of Shri G.D. Srivastava, District Judge, Deoria, abating the Plaintiffs'' suit under the provisions of Section 5 of the Consolidation of Holdings Act.

2.

The facts leading to this application in revision are not disputed and they may be narrated as follows. The Plaintiffs applicants filed a suit giving rise to this application in revision against the opposite party for demolition of the Defendant''s construction on plot No. 66 of area .46 acre and for a permanent injunction disturbing the possession of the Plaintiffs by raising any construction in future on the allegation that the Plaintiffs were bhumidhars of the disputed plot and the Defendant had no concern with it.

3.

The Defendant resisted the claim on various grounds. Subsequently, the Defendant moved an application in the Court of the Munsif alleging that the consolidation of holdings had already started in the district of Deoria and the Plaintiff''s suit stood abated. After hearing the parties the learned Munsif rejected the application. The Defendant then filed an application in revision before the District Judge Deoria and after hearing the parties the learned District Judge allowed the Defendant''s application in revision and directed that the Plaintiff''s suit stood abated. Substantially the suit was for demolition of the Defendant''s constructions alleged to have been raised by him illegally. Section 5(2) of the Consolidation of Holdings Act is as follows:

* * * *

A perusal of the above section shows that abatement of demolition suits in Civil Courts is not contemplated by the above section and I am supported in my view by the ruling reported in Hasrat v. Haridwar 1973 AWR 325. The Court, therefore, erred in directing that the Plaintiff''s suit for demolition should be abated u/s 5 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act.

4.

The application in revision is allowed with costs and the order of the Court below is set aside and the learned Munsif is directed to proceed with the trial according to law.