of compensation. The appel- late courts below have manifestly erred in law in reversing the decree of the court of first instance as the judgment and order of the Consolidation Officer is final and conclusive and cannot be overruled or brushed aside to record any findings contrary to it, more particularly when the plaintiff- appellant has adduced sufficient evidence to establish his right and possession over the suit land. 11. Learned Counsel for the State of Bihar set up the defence that the entire land of C.S.P. No. 332 is the pond land and it 6cannot be settled in favour of the plaintiff-appellant. He does not have any possession over the same. Secondly, in view of the bar imposed by Section 37 of the Consolidation Act, the civil suit as filed by the plaintiff-appellant itself was not maintainable and therefore the appellate courts below have not erred in reversing the order of the trial court and dismissing the suit. 12. On the submissions advanced by the parties and under the