UMA SHANKAR Vs. DY. DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Vivek Shandilya, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Vaibhav Shandilya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Uday Kanan Saxena, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Prabha Shanker Pandey and Shri G.R. Niranjan, learned counsel for the respondents as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

(2.) Petitioner is aggrieved with the order dtd. 10/10/2011 passed by Consolidation Officer, whereby restoration application dtd. 24/3/2000 moved on behalf of petitioner assailing the order dtd. 28/2/1996 has been rejected, and aforesaid order passed by Consolidation Officer has been affirmed by Deputy Director of Consolidation, on revision being filed on behalf of the petitioner vide order dtd. 15/9/2017.

(3.) Facts culled out from the record are that present petitioner and his two brothers, namely, Govind Prasad and Brij Mohan have filed an objection dtd. 19/1/1989 under Sec. 9(A)2 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (in brevity 'U.P.C.H. Act') along with delay condonation application against contesting respondents claiming their right, title and interest over the property in question on the basis of gift deed dtd. 10/7/1938 and 21/2/1939 said to have been executed by Ram Lal, who was, as claimed by petitioner, his maternal grandfather. Aforesaid objection filed on behalf of the petitioner was ordered to be dismissed in default vide order dtd. 28/2/1996 (Annexure No. 2). At belated stage, petitioner has filed restoration application dtd. 24/3/2000 (Annexure No. 3) supported by affidavit along with an application for condonation of delay under Sec. 5 of Limitation Act. Against said restoration application, two sets of objection were filed; (i) Ram Sewak (respondent No. 5) has filed his objection dtd. 13/2/2003 (Annexure No. 4) and (ii) Shyam Narayan along with Sri Ram (respondent Nos. 3 and 4) have filed separate objection dtd. 2/4/2003 (Annexure No. 5). After due consideration, Consolidation Officer has rejected the restoration application vide order dtd. 10/10/2011 (Annexure No. 6). Deputy Director of Consolidation, on revision being filed on behalf of petitioner and others, has dismissed the same vide order dtd. 15/9/2017, which is under challenge before this Court.