BUDHDAN Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AZAMGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The dispute in this case relates to a sale-deed executed by one Kesho son of Sheo Gulam in favor of the Petitioner Budhdan (since deceased) now represented through his legal heirs in the present writ petition. The Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are real brothers of the Petitioner Budhdan who contend that the said holding was purchased out of joint family nucleus funds and hence the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 were also entitled to their respective shares in the said holding.

(2.) Accordingly an objection under Section 9 of the U.P.C.H. Act, was filed by the said Respondents contending that the name of the Petitioner, which was entered as the sole Bhumidar of the disputed Khata No. 64, should be corrected by recording the names of the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 also along with the Petitioner.

(3.) The Petitioner filed a counter objection that he was living separately from the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 since the past one decade of the date of transaction, and if the names of the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have been wrongly recorded over some other plots the same would not militate against the partitioned status of the family. The property in dispute was claimed by the Petitioner as a self-acquired property. The Petitioner also contended that the sale consideration was of Rs. 1500/- and it was paid entirely by the Petitioner out of his own personal earnings and the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have no share in the property in dispute.