The Tehsildar rejected the application.
On the basis of the aforesaid order the father of defendant Nos.2 and 3, filed an application before the Collector and Collector vide order dated 14.3.1968 granted the suit land in area 72 Bigas and 18 Biswas to the father of defendant Nos.2 and 3 as Bhumiswami.
After the death of their father, defendant Nos.2 and 3 filed an application before the Collector that their names be recorded as Bhumiswami over the aforesaid land and that application has been allowed by the Collector on 13.05.1968.
Apart from that, there was admission made by the defendant that villagers had been grazing their cattle in the land in question up to 1967.
The plaintiffs respondents filed suit for declaration and permanent injunction with respect to the suit land.
Kalu Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Singh, father of defendant Nos.2 and 3, who was the ex NARENDRA PRASAD Date 2019.03.09 110502 IST Reason zamindar filed an application before the Tehsildar praying that the suit land be granted to him because it was recorded in his name before the abolition of Zamindari Rights.
As against the said orders, the plaintiffs filed the suit.
Thereafter, the appeal was filed before the Board of Revenue by Kalusingh.
They specifically pleaded that the suit land was recorded as Charnoi and it had been used for the purpose of grazing their cattle by the villagers and illegally it has been given to the defendants.
Relying upon the admission companypled with the khasra entries to which statutory presumption of companyrectness is attached.
Thereafter, he filed appeals before the Sub Divisional Officer and Additional Commissioner both the authorities dismissed the appeals.
The Board of Revenue vide order dated 2.12.1959 set aside the orders of Tehsildar and Sub Divisional Officer and Additional Commissioner and held that Kalusingh is entitled to get the land in his name as Bhumiswami, in view of Section 5 f of the Madhya Bharat Zamindari Abolition Act.
In the instant case, the entries prior to the date of abolition clearly record the land to be Charnoi land and subsequent thereto also the land had been recorded companytinuously as Charnoi land.
The issue in the present appeal is whether the land recorded as Charnoi i.e. Common land for grazing of cattle of villagers vests in State on abolition of intermediaries on 02.10.1951 or it was saved from vesting in favour of proprietor being grove under section 5 f of the Madhya Bharat Abolition of Zamindari Act.
