RAM JATAN Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted. Heard the counsel on both sides.

(2.) The Director of the Consolidation recorded as a fact that Newaj Mal, the maternal grand-father of the respondent No. 2 had executed a registered Will bequeathing his property to the respondent. This fact was not disputed by the lower authorities. Thereby, the Director had set aside the orders passed by the Consolidation Officer and the Settlement Officer, the appellate authority and had held that the respondent is entitled to be mutated in the records as an owner of the land in dispute. In writ petition, the High Court has upheld that finding. Thus it dismissed the Writ Petition No. 9233/80 by order dated January 18, 1993.

(3.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that by virtue of Class IV of the order of succession given in Section 24 of the Agral Tenancy Act, the appellant being the brother of the deceased Newaj Mal, is entitled to preferential succession to the respondent who comes under Class VI, viz., Daughter's son. It is contended that the respondent was co-sharer during the life-time of the Newaj Mal:he was 18 years old at the time and that, therefore, he can have a preferential right to the appellant.