Core Holding: Continuance of a person's name in revenue records after an order deleting their name from possession does not confer any rights, such as Asami rights, and without Asami rights, no Sirdari rights can arise. [judgement_subject][judgement_act_referred] (!) (!) (!) [1000629410005][1000629410008][1000629410010][1000629410011][1000629410012][1000629410014]

Land Ownership and Escheat: Badri Aswal owned agricultural land (62 Nali 1 Muthi) in Village Gyansu; after his death without issue, wife Tulsa Devi claimed adoption of Bhopalu (not mutated), died issueless pre-independence, leading to escheat to the State under then-applicable law. [1000629410019] (!) [1000629410005] (!) [1000629410015] (!) [1000629410016]

Amar Singh's Possession and Collector Order: Amar Singh managed land for Bhopalu, continued possession post-Bhopalu's death; Collector Tehri Garhwal ordered (17.04.1956) release of Tulsa Devi's land from his possession, allowing retention of only 4 Nali 1 Muthi for house, Gaushala, Sagwara; Amar Singh signed document (14.05.1956) confirming handover of rest, excluding Plot No. 719. [1000629410019] (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) [1000629410005][1000629410016] (!)

Land Acquisition and Exchange: State acquired village land for buildings, used escheated Tulsa Devi land for exchange instead of compensation; Plot Nos. 641, 719 allocated to Mor Singh (defendants' predecessor) in exchange for his acquired Plot No. 611; partition led to defendants' ownership since 24.03.1969. (!) (!) (!) [1000629410015]

Record Operations (1952-1963): Amar Singh's name appeared in possession on some Tulsa Devi plots; A.R.O. ordered (06.05.1961/01.05.1963) deletion as surreptitiously/forged entries by officials, possession already handed to Malguzar; records corrected accordingly. (!) (!) (!) (!) [1000629410007][1000629410008] (!) [1000629410010]

Asami Rights under 1960 Act Section 10(e): Asami status for those recorded as occupants immediately preceding appointed date in last revision under U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901; Amar Singh not a recorded occupant post-deletion order, thus ineligible. (!) [1000629410006] (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) [1000629410007][1000629410010]

Patwari Entries (1379-1385 Fasli/1979-1985): Patwari entered Asami status w.e.f. 01.01.1974 and Sirdar rights for Plots 641, 719, 697 based on 19.12.1973 G.O.; unauthorized as Patwari lacked competence—only Assistant Collector could confer such rights; no basis without prior Asami status. (!) (!) [1000629410013] (!) (!) (!) [1000629410014]

Trial Court Decree and High Court Reversal: Trial court (13.08.1996) decreed plaintiffs' injunction suit, holding deletion order ineffective/unimplemented, entries not forged, Amar Singh retained possession/Sirdar rights; High Court (28.07.2006) reversed, ruling deletion order binding, entries surreptitious/unauthorized, no rights accrued, exchange valid, defendants in possession. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)

Revenue Entries' Presumption: Entries presumed correct unless shown fraudulent/surreptitious; here, A.R.O. order confirmed surreptitious entry, robbing legal effect. (!) [1000629410011][1000629410012]

Supreme Court Outcome: Appeal dismissed; no merit as Amar Singh ineligible for Asami/Sirdar rights, plot validly exchanged to defendants' predecessor. [1000629410002][1000629410003][1000629410004][1000629410017][1000629410018]