MAYA SHANKER Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION VARANASI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the Petitioners and perused the impugned orders passed by Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

(2.) DEPUTY Director of Consolidation has held that the sale -deed in question executed by guardian, mother of the Petitioners was allegedly voidable and not a void document and as such he ordered the name of the transferee Bhajjan be mutated in place of the landlords on the basis of the sale -deed in question.

(3.) THE consolidation authorities cannot refuse to mutate the name of the vendee on the basis of the sale -deed, which can be challenged as void document in the competent civil Court. The consolidation authorities have to record the name of the vendee on the basis of the sale -deed in question, which is not a void document -See, 1976 LLJ 52 (FB). In this view of the matter I do not find any error of fact, law or jurisdiction so as to call for interference by this Court in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution.