PHULESHAR AND OTHERS Vs. ALI HUSSAIN AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri B.B.Paul for the petitioners and Sri Ashok Kumar for respondents-1 and 2.

(2.) The writ petition has been filed for quashing the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation, Ghazipur (respondent-5) dated 17.05.1999, passed in Revision No. 786, Ali Hussain and others Vs. Phulesar and others and order of the Consolidation Officer, Sadat, Ghazipur ((respondent-3) dated 21.08.1989 passed in Case Nos. 352 and 353, Sirazuddin and others Vs. State and others, in title proceedings under U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(3.) The dispute relates to the land of khata No. 23 of village Bhurkura, pargana Sadiabad, district Ghazipur. In basic consolidation records, names of Phulesar son of Basgit, Ahmad, Gama and Islam alias Nanhu sons of Lalmuni and Panna and Sakoor sons of Jagaloo were recorded over the khata in dispute. Ali Hussain and Gulab sons of Noor Mohammad (respondents-1 and 2) filed an objection for recording their names as co-sharer of 1/4 share in the khata in dispute. A dispute was also referred for recording the names of Sirajuddin and Istekhar sons of Gama as Gama was dead. The objections were registered as Case No. 352, Sirazuddin and others Vs. State and others and Case No. 353 Ali Hussain and another Vs. Sirajuddin and others and tried by respondent-3. The case of the petitioners was that Kharbhan, Nakchhed and Kalicharan were brothers. Phulesar (petitioner-1) is the grandson of Kharbhan and petitioners-2 to 6 are grandson and great grandsons of Nakchhed. The dispute is in respect of Noor Mohammad (father of respondents-1 and 2). According to the petitioners Deepu the only son of Kalicharan had no male issue. Noor Mohammad was son of Kharpattu of village Chhatrama, P.S. Birno. district Ghazipur and came along with his mother Sughari who had remarried to Deepu son of Kalicharan. Due to this reason, name of Sughari was recorded in the revenue record and name of Noor Mohammad was not recorded on the death of Deepu. On the death of Sughari, her share was inherited by the petitioners by way of survivorship and their names were recorded during last consolidation in the village, which entry continued till basic consolidation year. According to respondents-1 and 2 Noor Mohammad was son of Deepu. Noor Mohammad was an insane person as such after death of Deepu name of Sughari was recorded in the revenue records. Respondents-1 and 2 further asserts their title on the ground that the property in dispute was self acquired property of Sughari as such on her death Noor Mohammad inherited the property in dispute being her son (which is admitted to all the parties). Apart from documentary evidence, respondents-1 and 2 examined Ali Hussain as PW-1, Subhratan widow of Nohar (daughter of Deepu) as PW-2 and Hardeo as PW-3. The petitioners apart from documentary evidence examined Phulesar as DW-1, Khichad as DW-2 and Tapesar Yadav as DW-3.