Shamsuddin Ahmed. J.:

1. In this application under Art. 227 of the Constitution an order passed by the learned Additional Dist Judge, Midnapur in Misc. Appeal no. I of 88 affirming the order passed by the learned Munsif Addl. Court Contai in Judicial Misc. Case no. 28 0f 87 is under challenge. The order concerned involves an application under s. g of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act.

2. The petitioner claimed to be a co-sharer n respect of plot no. 157 of Khatian no. 254 and plot no. 216 of khatian no. 152. According to her deceased husband Chaitannaya Maity was the owner of these two plots. On his death she along with her son Lakshmi Kanta Roy succedded her late husband. Lakshmi Kanta Roy sold his interest in the disputed property to the opposite party by a deed executed on 18.7.82 and registered on 19.7.82 without any notice to her as required under s. 5(4) of the Lands Reforms Act. She further alleged that the transferee opposite party was not a cosharer in respect of the disputed property even though he had purchased some property from her son earlier but in respect of the disputed property the was not a co-sharer. Courts below found that the opposite party is not a co-