CHHOTEY LAL Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Mr. Siddharth Nandan, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Ashish Srivastava, learned counsel for the contesting respondents, Mr. Tarun Gaur, learned standing counsel for the State-respondents and Mr. Sher Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-Gaon Sabha.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that two suits under Sec. 229-B of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the "U.P. Z.A. and L.R. Act") were filed by Bachan Lal and others (respondent Nos. 4 to 6) with the allegation that plaintiffs are entitled to be recorded over the plot in question on the basis of sale deed dtd. 22/6/1985 executed in favour of Smt. Nandrani and Smt. Leelawati by Smt. Hulaso. The aforementioned suits were registered as Suit Nos. 10 and 11 of 2003-04. On the basis of sale deed, mutation case under Sec. 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act was filed by Smt. Nand Rani. The Tehsildar, Puranpur rejected the mutation case of Smt. Nand Rani and on the basis of will deed executed in favour of petitioners Chhote Lal and others, the name of Chhote Lal and others was ordered to be recorded vide order dtd. 30/4/1986. Against the order dtd. 30/4/1986 passed by the Tehsildar, Smt. Hulaso filed appeal before the Sub- Divisional Officer which was allowed and the matter was remanded back vide order dtd. 31/12/1986. Against the order dtd. 31/12/1986, Raj Kumar and others filed revision before the Commissioner and the Additional Commissioner vide order dtd. 10/5/1988, sent the reference before the Board of Revenue, accordingly, the Board of Revenue vide order dtd. 28/1/1999 set aside the order dtd. 31/12/1986 and maintained the order dtd. 30/4/1986 passed by the Tehsildar for recording the name of the petitioners on the basis of unregistered will deed dtd. 24/10/1976. Against the order of the Board of Revenue dtd. 28/1/1999, Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.35804/1999 was filed by respondent Nos. 4 to 6 (Bachan Lal and others) which was dismissed by this Court vide order dtd. 10/7/2003. The Suit Nos. 10 and 11 of 2003-04 were consolidated by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Puranpur and vide order dtd. 27/12/2005, aforementioned suits were dismissed. Against the judgment and decree of the trial court dtd. 27/12/2005, respondent Nos. 4 to 6 filed two appeals, which were registered as Appeal Nos. 14 and 15 of 2005-06 before respondent No. 2/Commissioner, Bareilly Division, Bareilly. The aforementioned appeals were heard by respondent No. 2 and allowed vide judgment dtd. 27/8/2010, setting aside the judgment of the trial court dtd. 27/8/2010, recording finding of fact that unregistered will deed set up by the petitioners, has not been proved in accordance with law. Against the judgment of the Additional Commis- sioner dtd. 27/8/2010, two appeals were filed before respondent No. 1/Board of Revenue, U.P. at Allahabad which were registered as Second Appeal Nos. 21 and 22 of 2009-10. The aforementioned appeals were heard together and vide order dtd. 7/10/2010 respondent No. 1/Board of Revenue dismissed the aforementioned second appeals at the admission stage, without summoning the records of the proceeding. Petitioners filed two review petitions before the Board of Revenue against the judgment dtd. 7/10/2010 which were dismissed vide common order dtd. 3/11/2010. Hence, this writ petition for the following relief:-

(3.) This Court entertained the mat- ter on 23/11/2010, issued notice to respondent Nos. 4 to 7 and granted interim protection in the matter. In pursuance of the order dtd. 23/11/2010, parties have exchanged their pleadings.