NARASAMMA Vs. EXECUTIVE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present review petition is filed on the footing that the present petitioners are the legal heirs of the third respondent in the writ petition. It is further contended that as on the date of the order, the third respondent was no more and therefore, the order passed does not bind the third respondent. It is further contended that the relief granted in the writ petition was to direct the authorities to reverse the entry insofar as transfer of khata in favour of the third respondent to that of the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioners are before this court to contend that there was gross suppression of facts and that title to the property in question was very much in the name of the third respondent and consequently, it is now with the present review petitioners, who are the legal heirs of the third respondent.

(2.) IF that is the position, it would be open for the petitioners to approach the competent authorities to seek transfer of khata, since khata would follow title to the property. There is hence no question of review even if the third respondent was dead as on the date of the order passed in the writ petition, as that fact was never brought to the attention of this court. With the above observation, the petition stands disposed of without prejudice to the claim of the review petitioners, which they may raise before the appropriate authorities.