Having failed to obtain declaration under Section 229 B (1) of U P Z A. and L. R. Act 1 of 1951 from Board of Revenue and Additional Commissioner, the second and first appellate Court that Deoki, the childless widowed daughter of Ganesha one of the wives of Sheo Jatan and transferor of opposite party No. 1, was only an estate holder of the fixed rate tenancy bequeathed in her favour by her father on 18-7-1947 the pet. tioners grandsons of Sheo Jatan from another wife Smt. Jalewa have come to this Court.

the decision becomes obiter dicta and the question whether a life estate holder held one or the other capacity mentioned in Section 18 of the Z. A. Act on the date of vesting to entitle her to acquire bhumidhari rights is still at large.

The touch-stone on which this controversy has to be decided is the status of the life estate holder on date of vesting. It necessarily relates back to the date when succession opened as the life estate holder shall have the same status and interests on the date of vesting as she had when the property devolved on her. The question, therefore is, did property vest in Deoki who was life estate holder on the date when Sheo Jatan died ? Fo