SHEESHPAL Vs. ADDL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition arises out of mutation proceedings. Both the petitioners as well as respondents No.5 & 6 are real brothers, sons of Ganga Das. After the death of Ganga Das over the agricultural land left behind by him the names of all the four sons were mutated in the revenue record. Thereafter, respondents No.5 & 6 came forward with the case that late Sri Ganga Das had executed registered Will in their favour on 24.06.2001 hence only their names must be mutated. Their case was not accepted by Tehsildar, Hapur who decided the Case No.687 and 688, Bhagmal Vs. Ganga Das on 20.09.2002 maintaining the earlier order of mutation dated 20.08.2002 ( in favour of all the four sons). Against the said order, respondents No.5 & 6, Take Chand and Bhagmal filed Appeal No.48. S.D.O. Hapur, District Ghaziabad dismissed the appeal on 22.07.2004. Against the said order, respondents No.5 & 6 filed Revision No.119 of 2003-04. Additional Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut allowed the revision on 23.08.2006 and directed entry of the names of respondents No.5 & 6 alone on the basis of Will dated 24.06.2001 in the revenue record. The said order has been challenged through this writ petition.

(2.) IN the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, it is mentioned that Ramphal one of the attesting witnesses of the Will was examined who stated that Ganga Das after hearing the contents of the Will willingly put his thumb impression thereupon. The other witness i.e. Jaichand was also examined. Orders passed on mutation applications are always subject to the result of the regular suit based on title. There is no such error in the impugned order which may warrant interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: