TULSI RAM Vs. ADDL. COMMISSIONER (JUD.), LUCKNOW

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Avadhesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Alok Kirti, learned counsel for respondents no.6, 7 & 8 and Shri Shiv Poojan Maurya, learned counsel for respondent no.4.

(2.) This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioners against the orders passed by the Revenue Courts in mutation proceedings. For the purposes of resolution of the controversy involved in this petition, following pedigree is relevant to be mentioned. Triloki

(3.) The original admitted tenure holder of the land in dispute was Bhawani, who died issue -less. After his death, an application under Section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act was moved by the petitioners for mutation of their names in place of the deceased tenure holder Bhawani, on the basis of a Will allegedly executed by Bhawani on 28.04.1977. Another set of objections was filed by Ram Kumar, S/o Shyam Behari claiming mutation over the property in question on the basis of another alleged Will dated 18.05.1977. In addition to the aforesaid two claimants, namely, petitioners and Ram Kumar, two other set of claimants, namely Ramdin and Ram Swarup also filed objections claiming therein that they are entitled to get their names mutated over the property in dispute in place of the deceased tenure holder on the basis of succession in terms of the relevant provisions of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act. The matter was contested and after evaluation of the evidence, the Tehsildar passed an order on 27.02.1984, whereby he discarded both the Wills produced by the petitioners as well as Ram Kumar that is the Will dated 18.05.1977 and 28.04.1977. The Tehsildar, thus, ordered the mutation on the basis of succession in the name of the other brothers or heirs of the other brothers of the deceased tenure holder Bhawani.