RUKHSANA JAFAR Vs. D D C

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SUPPLEMENTARY affidavit filed today is taken on record. Heard Shri Prabhakar Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri Pulak Ganguli, who has filed caveat on behalf of respondent No. 3.

(2.) THE petitioner is purchaser from respondent No. 6 who in turn had purchased the property from respondent No. 5. All these transfers are transfers pendente lite. Since the respondents 5 and 6 have admittedly executed a sale deed of the property in question, there appears no legal necessity to issue notices to them, especially, in view of the order proposed to be passed.

(3.) ON the start of consolidation operations, an objection was filed by the respondent No. 5 claiming title on the basis of adverse possession. This objection was allowed by the Consolidation Officer. The order of the Consolidation Officer was challenged by means of appeal filed by the respondent Nos. 3 and 4. The respondent No. 3 is also a transferee pendente lite from the recorded tenure holders of the property in dispute.