JUDGMENT

B.L. Yadav, J. - This petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the orders passed by the Consolidation authorities.

2. The plots in dispute are Kati Nos. 5, 62 and 202 of village Baniapur and Khata Nos. 31, 41 and 42 of village Jam in Baniapur. In proceedings u/s 9A(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, (for short the Act), an objection was filed by the Petitioners claiming 11/12 share on the basis of a compromise dated 27.05.1944 entered in to in a mutation case and it was alleged that that order became final and they were entitled to that share.

3. The case of the Petitioner was contested by the contesting Respondents 4 to 11, who alleged that the Petitioners were not entitled to 11/12 share rather they were entitled to a share according to the pedigree. The consolidation authorities rejected the claim of the Petitioners in respect of these Kats mainly on the ground that the compromise dated 27.4.1944 in a mud anion proceeding was not admissible as it was not in respect of a title suit but only in respect of correction of papers or mutation proceedings.

4. The learned Counsel for the Petitioners urged that the compromise dated 27.05.