JUDGMENT

S.N. katju, J. - This defendant's appeal arises out of suit for possession over some trees situated on the plots in suit. The plaintiff-respondent No. 1 alleged that Ranjit Singh, the brother of appellant Amar Singh was the Sabhapati of village Baripur at the time of the abolition of zamindari. The appellant taking advantage of his brother's position filed a declaratory suit after the abolition of zamindari in respect of the plots mentioned in the plaint which were recorded as `banjar, usar and talab' and which had vested in the Gaon Sabha. In the aforesaid suit Ranjit Singh had admitted the claim of the appellant and the latter obtained a collusive decree in the year 1953. Thereafter the villagers complained to the Sub-Divisional Officer who passed an order of attachment of the trees in dispute and also passed an order under Section 212 of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act on 24-1-1955 delivering the possession of the trees to the Gaon Sabha. The appellant thereafter filed suit No. 184 of 1956 in the court of Munsif West, Allahabad for possession of the plots in suit which was dismissed in the year 1960 and the decision of the trial court was confirmed in appeal. Meanwhile proceedings under Section 145, Cr. P. C. were going on and an order was passed by the S. D. M. on 7-1-1959 for the release of the disputed trees in favour of the present appellant, Thereafter an application was moved under Section 435, Cr. P. C. for revising the order of the S. D. M. dated 7-1-1959. The Additional District Magistrate made a reference to the High Court on 14-5-1959 recommending the setting aside of the order of the S.D.M. dated 7-1-1959. The aforesaid reference was rejected by the High Court on 24-11-1959. Thereafter the Gaon Sabha filed the present suit in appeal. It was opposed by the appellant on the grounds inter alia that the trees in dispute had been planted by him along with his brothers and their predecessor in interest and that neither the former zamindar nor the Gaon Sabha had any interest in the said trees; that the final order under Section 145, Cr. P. C. was passed on 5-11-1958 and not on 7-1-1959 as was alleged by the appellant and, therefore, the suit having been filed beyond 3 years of the passing of the final order was barred by Article 47 of the Limitation Act.

2. The trial court held that the order of the High Court rejecting the reference dated 24-11-1959 was a final order within the meaning of Article 47 of the Limitation Act and the suit in appeal which was filed on 19-1-1962 was within time.

3. It may be mentioned that the Sub-Divisional Magistrate at first passed an order on 5-11-1958. Again on 7-1-1959 the Magistrate directed the appellant to be put in possession of the trees in dispute. At first the appellant contended that the final order in the case was the order passed on 5-11-1958 but in the course of argument before the trial court it was conceded by the appellant that the final order was the order dated 7-1-1959. It appears that village Baripur came under consolidation operations while the present litigation was going on between the parties. It was held in the consolidation proceedings that the land mentioned in the plaint was `banjar usar and talab' and it had vested in the Gaon Sabha. The court below expressed the view that the aforesaid decision of the consolidation court had set at rest the question of title about the land in the plaint. With regard to the trees in dispute it affirmed the finding of the trial court that the Gaon Sabha was their owner. It observed :

"The learned Munsif has discussed the evidence of the parties on the point of title with regard to the trees and I have no reason to differ with his observation that the trees in dispute have vested in Gaon Sabha and they were scattered trees and were covered by the provision of Section 6 (a) of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act."

I agree with the aforesaid finding of the court below. It was strenuously contended that the suit having been filed beyond 3