LALLAN LAL Vs. DY. DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION KUSHINAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri A. P. Tiwari, counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.C. Singh, counsel for respondent-2.

(2.) The writ petition has been filed against the order Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 30.07.2013, passed in title proceeding, under U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(3.) The dispute relates to the land of basic consolidation year khatas 38 and 127 of village Jakhniya, khatas 42 and 154 of village Sirsiya, khatas 36 and 165 of village Mishrauli and khata 269 of village Malahiya, pargana Sidhuwa Jobna, district Kushinagar. In basic consolidation records, the name of Ram Pyare Lal was alone recorded, over the aforesaid khatas, except khata 36 of village Jakhniya, which was jointly recorded in the names of Ram Pyare Lal, Indrajeet, Thakur Lal and Mohan Lal. Indrajeet and Mohan Lal filed an objection, under Section 9 of the Act, claiming themselves to be the co-tenants, having 1/3 share each, in the khatas in dispute. It has been stated by them that the disputed land were acquired by their father, in the name of Ram Pyare Lal with their own income or from joint family fund, time to time. Both the parties remained in joint possession over the disputed land through out. It was partitioned by the award of Panches dated 26.07.1962 but it could not be given effect to in the revenue records and the name of Ram Pyare Lal continued, over the land which were acquired in his name by their father. Ram Pyare Lal (now represented by the petitioner and respondents-3 to 6) (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner) filed another objection under Section 9 of the Act, for deleting the names of Indrajeet, Thakur Lal and Mohan Lal from khata 36 of village Jakhniya and recording his name exclusively over it. It has been stated by the petitioner that entire land in dispute were self acquisition of Ram Pyare Lal, from his own income and not by their father. Entire joint family properties were partitioned during the life time of the father, who died in the year 1948. The respondent never raised any dispute in respect of the land in dispute although two settlements of revenue records took place after partition. The petitioner is in exclusive possession over the land in dispute since the date of its acquisition. Both the objections were registered as Case no. 39, under Section 9-A (2) of the Act and tried by the Consolidation Officer (Final Record), Padrauna, Deoria.