RAI SAHEB PANNA LAL Vs. D D C

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed against the judgment and orders dated 28.12.1971 passed by the Consolidation Officer, Aliganj, District Etah, 21.7.1972 passed by the Assistant Settlement Officer Consolidation, Mainpuri Camp at Etah and 18.12.1972 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation Gorakhpur Camp at Etah.

(2.) Originally the dispute was related to several khatas i.e. Khata Nos. 17, 22, 20, 57, 91, 68, 45, 60, 23 and 89 of Village Chandpur Zindahar, Pargana Etah, District Etah. In the present petition the dispute is confined to only Khata Nos. 17 and 57. In Khata No. 17 Smt. Ganga Devi was exclusively recorded in the basic year and in Khata No. 57 Sohrab, Neksey and Rai Saheb Panna Lal (Petitioner) were jointly recorded. In other khatas the Petitioner, Smt. Ganga Devi and the private Respondents have been recorded jointly in different combinations. Before the Consolidation Officer objections were filed by the Petitioner claiming that he should be recorded in place of Smt. Ganga Devi on the ground of inheritance being son of the sister of Sripal, husband of Smt. Ganga Devi. It would be relevant to record here that according to the Petitioner, Tika Ram had two sons Sripal & Mewa Ram and one daughter Smt. Ram Piyari. Smt. Ganga Devi is the wife of Sripal. Further Mewa Ram died issue less, who is said to have executed a Will in favour of the Petitioner. The only dispute with regard to the pedigree raised by the Respondents is that Smt. Ram Piyari was not the daughter of Tika Ram but was the daughter of Tika Ram's wife's sister.

(3.) Before the Consolidation Officer evidence was led by the parties. The Consolidation Officer framed as many as 14 issues. The Issue No. 1 was as to who is the legal heir of Smt. Ganga Devi and the Issue No. 2 was whether Rai Saheb Panna Lal (Petitioner) was the daughter's son of Tika Ram. The finding recorded by the Consolidation Officer on these issues was that the Petitioner was the daughter's son of Tika Ram or in other words the son of the sister of Sripal and Mewa Ram and would therefore inherit the estate of Ganga Devi. However, with regard to the shares in Khata No. 17, he gave 1/6 share to the Petitioner and the remaining 5/6 share was given to other claimants on the basis of their adverse possession. With regard to Khata No. 57 the Consolidation Officer determined the share of the Petitioner on one side and Sohrab on the other side as 1/2 each. It may be noted that Neksey brother of Sohrab had died issueless and his share would go to Sohrab.