Hon’ble Shri Narayan Shukla, J.—Heard Mr. Ravi Nath Tilhari, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for opposite parties 1 to 5 as well as Mr. Anoop Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for opposite party

No. 6.

2. The dispute relates to the land of Gata No. 292 bearing area 0.28 hectare and gata No. 336 bearing area 0.10 hectare situate at village Colenalganj Urban Area, Pargana Gawarich, Tehsil Colenalganj, district Gonda. One Smt. Dulara widow of Bale Ram was the recorded tenure holder initially as Sirdar of the land in dispute. She being widow and unable to cultivate the land had let it out to one Ala Din s/o Sri Elahi Bux for cultivation.

3. The petitioner No. 1 is the son of Smt. Dulara and petitioner No. 2 and 3 are sons of Jagdish Prasad elder son of Smt. Dulara and opposite party No. 6 is the son of Ala Din. Smt. Dulara instituted a suit i.e. 23 of 66 under Section 202 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act for eviction of Asami. The father of opposite party No. 6 demanded the possession of the disputed land for cultivating the same but Mr. Ala Din refused to handover the possession. Ultimately, both the parties entered into compromise and submitted the same before the Judicial Officer, Tarabganj in which Mr. Ala Din admitted the Sirdari right of Smt. Dulrara and conceded to decree the suit in her favour. Accordingly, the suit was decreed on 20.10.1966 but it appears that the name of Smt. Dulara left to be mutated in the revenue record rather the name of Mr. Ala Din was entered into the revenue record in the column of original tenure holder. Therefore, Smt. Dulara on 4.10.1967 moved an application for mutation before the Judicial Magistrate, Gonda, which was rejected on the ground of jurisdiction with the observation that let she file an application for entering her name in the record before the Court concerned. Thereafter, she again moved an application on 10.8.76 before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Tarabganj in which a report was submitted for order by the revenue officer on 28.9.1976 but it appears that no order could be passed for mutation. Consequently, the name of both the parties continued in the revenue record showing Mr. Ala Din as Sirdar and Smt. Dulara under clause 9 entry. Thereafter Mr. Ala Din instituted a suit, which was registered as suit No. 283/502 under Sections 229-B and 209 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act for declaring him as tenure holder stating therein that he succeeded to get the said land from his ancestral and accordingly, he was in possession denying the right and title of Smt. Dulara over the land in dispute. Smt. Dulara contested the same on the ground that in suit No. 23 of 66 filed under Section 202 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, the parties had already entered into the compromise and accordingly, she was in possession of the land in dispute. Mr. Aladin moved an application for amendment of plaint, which was allowed and accordingly new para 8 was added to the effect that Smt. Dulara filed suit under Section 202 of U.P. Land Revenue Act but decree was not executed within the period of limitation provided therefor and he continuously remained in possession over that, as such, the right of Smt. Dulara ceased and he became Sirdar under Section 204 of Land Revenue Act. The plaint was further amended to the effect that from the title of the plaint, Section 229-B be deleted. However, the prayer made in para 7 to grant decree of declaration, declaring Ala Din to be the Sirdar of the land in dispute, was never deleted, as such even after amendment it continued to be a suit under Section 229-B and 209 of U.P. Land Revenue Act. The Sub-Divisonal Officer, Tarabganj framed necessary issues and by means of judgment and order dated 28.4.1977, dismissed the suit with the findings that it was barred by res judicata as suit No. 23 of 66 under Section 202 of Land Revenue Act was decreed on the basis of compromise and Smt. Dulara entered into possession of the land in dispute and continued in pos