ASHOK KUMAR SAINI Vs. SHAKUNTALA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition arises out of the proceedings in a revenue matter. The order challenged by the petitioner before this Court is the order dated 04.06.2015 passed by the Board of Revenue, Uttarakhand in Second Appeal No. 159/2013-14.

(2.) At this juncture, it must be stated that in a revenue matter as far as merits are concerned, all findings stands conclude with the second appeal before the Board of Revenue. This Court in a writ jurisdiction can only exercise supervisory power and review the findings of the subordinate courts, to a very limited extent.

(3.) The brief facts of the case are that a suit was filed by the petitioner under Section 176 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 for division of his holdings, being bhumidhar of the land. In the plaint, it was said that the defendant no. 1 and defendant no. 5 in the suit, inter alia, are maternal aunt (Mausi) and mother, respectively of the plaintiff. It was alleged that the plaintiff and the respondents have an equal 1/2 share of a property which has been divided between them as per a partition done before their community, but now the defendants have an evil design and they want to take away the property of the plaintiff as well, and therefore he needs a partition of the holdings. The suit was decreed ex parte. Later on a review petition was filed, which was also dismissed. In the review petition, for the first time, the defendants placed before the court a family partition of the year 1979 on the basis of which a partition decree was granted by the revenue court in the same year dividing 16 bighas of land, out of which 4 bighas of land was given to the present petitioner and 4 bighas of land was given to his mother and the remaining 8 bighas of land was given to his maternal aunt (Mausi) i.e. Shakuntala Devi. It appears that the property of which a division was actually made belong to maternal grandfather of the plaintiff i.e. the petitioner before this Court. Since he had two daughters, one Narayani Devi and another Shakuntala Devi, he had given equal share i.e. 8 bigha of land to them. Thereafter it appears that since by that time Narayani Devi had lost her husband i.e. the father of the petitioner and remarried, the 8 bigha of land which was in her share was equally divided between Narayani Devi and the petitioner as per the settlement of the year 1979. Based on that partition, there is also a decree of the court.