A person who is recorded as an occupant in the Khasra or Khatauni of 1356 Fasli, and who was evicted after June 30, 1948, is entitled to Adhivasi rights under Section 20 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950.

Judgment

HIDAYATULLAH, J.:

This judgment shall also govern the disposal of C. A. 681 of 1963. These are appeals by special leave of this Court against a common order of the Board of Revenue U. P. dated February 8, 1960 disposing of three appeals. Civil Appeal No. 682 of 1963 (since compromised) was also against the same decision. The appellant in each of these appeals is one Amba Prasad who was the Zamindar of village Rhonda, Pargana and Tehsil Khurja, District Bulandshahr, before the coming into operation of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. The opposite parties (who will be referred to as the answering respondents in this judgment) are persons whose names were recorded in column 23 (miscellaneous) in the Khasra for the year 1356 Fasli, as persons in possession and who claim, by reason of the entry, to be recorded occupants of the fields in dispute, and to have obtained Adhivasi rights in the fields under S. 20 of the Abolition Act. Though the point in dispute appears to lie within a very narrow compass the history of litigation in respect of these plots is as tedious as it is long. It must unfortunately be told to get a true measure of the arguments in the appeals.

2. Amba Prasad brought two suits under S. 180 of the U. P. Tenancy Act, 1939 for ejectment from the fields now in dispute and for damages, against Mohammad Ali and Mst. Sharifan respectively because their names were recorded in the Khasra as tenants bila tasfia lagan . These suits were dismissed by the trial Judge and Amba Prasad s appeal to the Commissioner failed on November 30, 1943. Amba Prasad then appealed to the Board of Revenue, U. P. and succeeded. The order of the Board of Revenue is dated March 19, 1949 (item No. 25), Mohammed Ali had died by then and was represented by one Faiyazali and six others. Mst. Sarifan had also died and was represented by one Abdul Sattar alias Chunna Khan and two others. As a result of the decision of the Board of Revenue possession of the fields was delivered . to Amba Prasad on July 1, 1949 - the day of the commencement of the year 1357 Fasli. The dakhalnamas are items Nos. 44 and 45 in this record and they mention fields Nos. 427 / 2, 428 / 2. 429. 430 and 380 (item No. .44) and fields Nos. 416, 418/1 and 418/2 (item No. 45) of village Rhonda, Pargana and Tehsil Khurja, District Bulandshahr.

3. Immediately after obtaining possession of the fields Amba Prasad was required to commence proceedings under S. 145, Criminal Procedure Code before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Anupshahr against Faiyazali and Abdul Sattar and others and on January 13, 1951 these proceedings terminated in favour of Amba Prasad (item No. 28). The Sessions Judge Bulandshahr made a reference to the High Court of Allahabad recommending that the order be vacated but the High Court declined to interfere. The order of the High Court is dated October 20, 1951 (item No. 29). Meanwhile Amba Prasad started a prosecution under S. 218, Indian Penal Code against the Lekhpal alleging that he had made false entries in the Revenue papers but the Magistrate, 1st Class, Bulandshahr discharged him by his order dated July 24, 1950 (item No. 26). An application for revision of the order filed by Amba Prasad was dismissed by the Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr on October 10, 1950 (item No. 27).

4. During the pendency of the proceedings under S. 145, Criminal Procedure Code these fields remained under attachment from August 23, 1949 (1358F) to November 6, 1951 (1359F). Two suits were then commenced in the Court of the Munsif, Khurja for declaration that crops of the fields under attachment belonged to the plaintiffs. One suit (97 of 1951) was filed by Abdul Noor Khan and others (answering respondents) and the other (67 of 1952) was filed by Sarfraz Ali Beg and 8 others (respondents in C. A. 682 of 1963 since compromised). These suits were directed against Amba Prasad and the plaintiffs claimed to be in possession of the fields by virtue of entries to this e