The authorities under the Consolidation Act, namely, the original appellate and the revisional authority duly companysidered the effect of the entries in the subsequent settlements and had recorded a finding that a fresh tenancy was given in favour of the appellants and number Beni Prasad, the respondent.
44 and 76 was based on an alleged settlement between the parties entered into in the year 1907.
The respondent, Beni Prasad filed objection claiming a right of companytenancy and the Consolidation Officer, on companysideration of his objection rejected the same.
144 of 1976 which arose out of a proceeding under the Consolidation Act The dispute centers around three Khatas, Khata No.
76 and 345 in village Jaraon.
The claim of respondent Beni Prasad in respect to Khata Nos.
44 in village Mamarkha and Khata Nos.
In the basic year namely the year in which the companysolidation proceeding was initiated, all these lands stood recorded in the name of the appellant.
The matter being carried to the High Court in a writ petition, the High Court had interfered with the findings arrived at by all the forums under the Consolidation Act.
This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Misc.
The name of respondent 4 is deleted, as prayed for.
He carried the matter in appeal and on being unsuccessful, he preferred revision.
Writ Petition No.
The revision also stood dismissed.
