PANNA PAL Vs. JAGANNATH PRASAD PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE are khata nos. 7,22,23,38 & 173 in dispute between the parties. Shorn of unnecessary details the petitioner had claimed 1/2 share in Khata Nos. 22, 23 and 173. The petitioner's name was not recorded over the aforesaid Khatas. His name was recorded over Khata No. 38. Some of the contesting opposite parties had filed an objection for expunction of the name of the petitioner over Khata no. 38. The consolidation officer partly accepted the claim of the petitioner to the extent of 1/4th share in some of the disputed plots. The petitioner's appeal failed before the appellate authority as is evident from the judgment dated 14-10-1969. The petitioner also failed before the revisional authority. Aggrieved by the judgments of the consolidation authorities, the petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.

(2.) THIS writ petition was heard and allowed by a learned Single Judge of this Court through his judgment dated 1-4-1980 but the order has been recalled due to the circumstance that the counsel for the opposite party was not heard.

(3.) I have considered the contentions raised on behalf of the parties and I have gone through the judgments of the consolidation authorities as well as the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 1-4-1980. It is noteworthy that the mortgage deed under consideration in the present case is dated 17-3-1920. The Redemption Suit No. 14/48 filed by Jagarnath Pal and Chandra Bhushan Pal was decreed in fovour of the plaintiffs as well as Gopal Prasad Pal, father of the present petitioner and Indra Mani Pal, father of the opposite party no. 5, in the present writ petition. At this stage, it would be better to quote the following pedigree :-(Pedigree omitted-Ed.)