LAKHMATI Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against the order dated 15-11-1977 passed in a proceeding under section 34 of the U. P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(2.) THE facts of the case are that one Ram Khelawan was recorded over the plots in dispute and he died. THEreafter his three sons, namely, Chandra Mani, Durg Vijai and Narain along with his grand sons Anurudh and Ambika made application under section 34 of the Act alleging that they have succeeded the deceased and hence their names may be recorded in place of the deceased. One Smt. Shanti was widow of Chandra Bhan, pre-deceased son of Ram Khelawan and Smt. Gujrati was also a widow. Ambika alleging to be grand son of deceased was the son of Smt. Gujrati whereas he alleged himself to be the son of Smt. Shanti Devi. Anrudh has also died and Smt. Lakhpati, his widow applied for being mutated as the widow of the pre-deceased grand-son of the deceased.

(3.) IT has further been urged that the present petition would not be barred by an alternative remedy and he has relied upon Jaipal v. Board of Revenue U. P. Allahabad, 1956 AWR 518 and also on Majid v. Manfait, 1981 AWC 185 and State of M. P. v Babu Lal, AIR 1977 SC 1718.