RAMA DUBEY Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Application for substitution is allowed.

(2.) These appeals arise from the Judgment of the High Court of Allahabad in C. M. W. P. No. 11059/80 dated December 4, 1985 and C. M. W. P. No. 9127/80 of even date.

(3.) The admitted facts are that Gajadhar and Harjeet are the recorded tenure holders of the lands in Plots Nos. 107 (sic) (0.33 acres), 1082 (0.40 acres), 1083 (0.10 acres), 1202 (0.30 acres),1203 (0.30 acres), 1204 (0.17 acres), 1210 (0.22 acres), 1069/3 (0.10 acres), 1106 (0.73 acres), 1199 (0.16 acres) and 1329 (0.55 acres) situated in Village Mahen Babu, Tehsil Salempur, Distt. Deoria (U.P.). On February 20, 1960 they had executed a registered gift deed in favour of their sister's daughter Smt. Rama the appellant not only in respect of movable properties but also in respect of immovable properties. Gajadhar died in 1969. The gift deed comprised of 11 plots of land. Harjeet, during his life-time had executed a Will on February 21, 1977 in respect of two plots of land. He died on February 22, 1977. During the life-time of Harjeet, in 1971, the appellant had filed proceedings before the Consolidation Officer to mutate her name in the record of rights as successor in interest on the basis of the gift deed executed by Gajadhar and Harjeet. Though notice was taken to Harjeet and served on him in person, he did not appear. Therefore, the order was passed ex parte mutating her name in respect of 11 plots gifted to her under the gift dead dated February 29, 1960. She also filed the proceedings after the demise of Harjeet to mutate her name in respect of 2 plots which were bequeathed to her. Ultimately,the respondent filed the Writ Petitions challenging the orders seeking condonation of delay which was rejected by the Tribunals below. The learned single Judge in the impugned order held that the respondent is a legal heir of the deceased Gajadhar and Harjeet and the refusal to condone the delay is not valid in law and accordingly, set aside the orders and remitted the matter to the Consolidation Officer to dispose of the matter on merits after recording the evidence and giving opportunity to the parties. Thus, these appeals by special leave.