JUDGMENT S.K. Lakhtakia, M. - This is a reference made by Additional Commissioner, Agra Division, Agra dated 17.6.87 whereby he has recommended that the revision filed against the order of the S.D.O. dated 16.2.84 be set aside and the application of Malkhey under Section 198-A be rejected holding it to be time-barred. 2. Briefly stated the facts of this case are that a patta was executed of the disputed land (area .50 acres) in favour of Malkhey by the Land Management Committee. The revisionist Mangi Singh is alleged to have forcibly occupied that land and annexed it with his own plot having an area of .07 acres. Malkhey Singh applied to the Sub-Divisional Officer under Section 198-A of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951 on 6.9.83 for being put in possession by the ejectment of the revisionist. 3. The revisionist filed an objection on the ground that he had not committed any trespass and that he had no concern with the disputed land or its area. 4. The learned Sub Divisional Officer, directed by his order dated 16.2.84 the Tahsildar to put the pattedar into possession of the area allotted to him by Land Management Committee. 5. The revisionist went up in revision before the Additional Commissioner who has sent the same to this court with the recommendation that the application of Malkhey be dismissed holding it to be time barred. 6. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties. Perused the record. 7. Learned counsel for the revisionist argued that application of Malkhey was time-barred on the date when it was filed before the trial court, hence it has rightly been recommended to be rejected. 8. Learned counsel for the opposite party argued that at present after the latest amendment ho limitation is prescribed under Section 198-A of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951, hence, there is no question of the application being rejected on the ground of limitation. It was further argued that the revisionist does not contest the claim of the pattedar about the area allotted to him, hence the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer is perfectly correct in directing the Tahsildar to put him in possession. 9. I find fore in the argument advanced on behalf of the opposite party. It was further argued that the revisionist does not contest the claim of the pattedar about the area allotted to him, hence the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer is perfectly correct in directing the Tahsildar to put him in possession. 9. I find fore in the argument advanced on behalf of the opposite party. The law as it exists today does not contain any limitation in the provisions of Section 198-A of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951 probably because the limitation provided under Section 210 of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951 covers this section as well. Consequently, if no application is made within the prescribed period as provided under Section 210 the trespasser will perfect his title and, therefore, neither any suit under Section 209 would be maintainable nor any application under Section 198-A would be entertain able. To provide a separate limitation for Section 198-A was, therefore, superfluous and has rightly been struck off by the Legislature. The application so moved in the instant case by Malkhey Singh, the pattedar, is, therefore, within limitation because a period of 12 years had not elapsed from the date of patta. The finding of the learned Additional Commissioner that the application was barred by limitation because it was moved after three years of the patta is, therefore, wrong and is against law and cannot be accepted. Malkhey Singh is admittedly pattedar and there is no dispute about his title over the land allotted to him so he is entitled to be put into possession if he is out of possession or the revisionist has ousted him. There is, therefore, no illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned S.D.O. The revision has wrongly been recommended to this court for being allowed. 10. In the result the reference is rejected and the revision is dismissed. The impugned order of the Sub Divisional Officer is maintained. Let the record be sent back to the Sub Divisional Officer for getting the delivery of possession made to Malkhey Singh after due demarcation of the land.