MAHADEO Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the time of arguments, no one appeared on behalf of contesting respondents. The main contesting respondent was respondent No.4, Smt. Phool Dulari. Sri A.K. Shukla, learned counsel filed an application for impleadment of Mangal at the place of Smt. Phool Dulari after her death claiming that Smt. Phool Dulari had executed Will in his favour. However, on the date of the arguments Sri A.K. Shukla did not appear. Accordingly, only the arguments of Sri U.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for petitioners were heard.

(2.) THIS writ petition arises out consolidation proceedings pertaining to title in respect of agricultural land left behind by Ganga Prasad, real brother of the petitioners. After the death of Ganga Prasad, the name of opposite party No.4, Smt. Phool Dulari was recorded over the agricultural land left behind by him as she was his widow. Petitioners claimed that opposite party No.4 had remarried with opposite party No.5, Babu Lal, hence she lost her right and the land reverted back to the petitioners being real brothers of Ganga Prasad. Opposite party No.5, Babu Lal is also real brother of the petitioners. All the three courts below, i.e. C.O., S.O.C. and D.D.C. held that Smt. Phool Dulari had not remarried with Babu Lal. The first order was passed by C.O. Rai Bareilly in Case No.929, Phool Dulari Vs. Ganga Prasad on 03.05.1978. That was a case under Section 12 of U.P.C.H. Act for mutation of name of Phool Dulari at the place of Ganga Prasad. Against the said order, petitioners filed appeal, which was dismissed by Assistant A.S.O.C. Pratapgarh Camp Raibareilly on 16.10.1978. Thereafter, revision No.602 was filed by the petitioner, which was dismissed by D.D.C. U.P. Lucknow Camp Rai Bareilly on 08.08.1980, hence this writ petition.

(3.) I do not find any error in the concurrent findings of the three courts below holding that no remarriage had taken place. The argument that Babu Lal had admitted that Smt. Phool Dulari had remarried with him, hence finding should have been recorded holding the remarriage to have been proved is not at all convincing. Babu Lal himself is real brother of the petitioners, hence he was interested in getting the land of his deceased brother Ganga Prasad. No formal marriage was ever averred. It was stated that she had done karao (baithaki) marriage with Babu Lal.