Unauthorized occupation of land and planting of saplings does not confer ownership rights over the land or the trees. The ownership of the tree goes with the owner of the land or the person who has the right over the land, unless there is a contrary agreement or provision of law.

Sibghat Ullah Khan, J.

1. Heard Shri Q.M. Haq, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned standing Counsel for the respondents. The question involved in this writ petition is that if some one plants some saplings over Gaon Sabha land, and the same grow into tress, that person becomes owner of the trees or not?

2. Petitioner was found in illegal possession of Gaon Sabha land hence proceedings for his eviction under sections 122B and 115C of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, were initiated in the form of case No. 9/31/75/136/288, Gaon Sabha v. Ram Pehr Singh. Tehsildar Balrampur, District Gonda passed the order of eviction on 30.3.1993 and imposed the damages of ` 18,500/-. Against the said order petitioner filed Revision No. 19/55. A.D.M./Additional Collector, Gonda, dismissed the revision on 20.6.1994 hence this writ petition.

3. Matter relates to plot Nos. 536 and 534 total area 1.05 acre. It was also stated that the petitioner had cut four Shisham trees. Petitioner pleaded that he was in possession since the time of his ancestors and further contended that trees had been planted by his ancestors.

4. Even though before the Courts below petitioner claimed possession over the land in dispute and sought to justify the same however during the arguments in this writ petition learned Counsel for the petitioner categorically stated that he was confining petitioner's right to the trees only.

5. If some one unauthorizedly occupies the land of another person particularly of Gaon Sabha and plants saplings thereupon, neither he can have right over the land nor the trees. The sapling in order to grow into a tree requires two essential things one is sunlight and other is rain. Someone who plants a sapling over the land of another cannot claim any right over sunlight and rain which falls over the said land and tree.

6. The ownership or right of the tree goes with the owner of the land or with the person who has got the right over the land, unless there is some contrary agreement or provision of law.

7. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has cited a division authority of this Court in Aman Singh and others v. Shivdhari and others 1966 R.D. 367. However, in the said case only validity of Rule 26-A of the Rules framed under U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act was considered and it was specifically held in the said case that trees had been purchased by the petitioner from the owners thereof.

8. The other authority cited by the learned Counsel for the petitioner in Tilakdhari Singh v. Durga Prasad Singh and others , 1967 R.D. 268. In the said case it was held that if before enforcement of zamindari abolition someone had planted trees around the pond he was owner of the trees as the said trees under section 6 of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act did not vest in the State nor settled with the Zamindar. I have some reservation in following the principle of law laid down therein for the simple reason that even though U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act did not say anything regarding such trees (planted on land which vested in the State on enforcement of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act) however, it did not settle such trees with their planters.

9. Moreover by virtue of section 4 of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act all estates vested in the State. Estate is defined under section 3(8) of the Act, according to which it means the area included under one entry in any of the registers described under section 32 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act. Area obviously means land of the area and land includes the trees standing thereupon. Section 6 merely provides consequence of the vesting regarding rights or interest of intermediaries i.e. Zamindars. Section 6(a)(i) uses the words "including land." The land obviously includes the trees standing thereupon. More over trees are specifically mentioned in the said clause. The only exception is of the trees in village abadi holding or grove. Accordingly a tree which is not