BODH RAJ Vs. JOINT DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the writ petitions have been filed against the order dated 28.9.1979 passed by the Joint Director of Consolidation, Faizabad, by means of which he has decided three revisions between the parties. In order to appreciate the facts of this case the following pedigree shall be useful: - -

(2.) THE facts leading the writ petitions as emerging from the file are that a dispute is with regard to three Khatas, namely, Nos. 73, 363 and 164. In the basic year in Khata No. 73, there were only 15 plots having total area of 9 bighas, 8 biswas and 10 biswansis. In Khata No. 363 there were 33 plots which were recorded in the names of Bodhraj, Rikhraj and Rudali sons of Tulsi. In Khata No. 164 there were 10 plots measuring 3 bighas, 6 biswas and 10 biswansis. They were entered in the names of Udairaj and Ram Kuber sons of Shree as Sirdars. At the time of verification during consolidation operations in Khata No. 164, the owners were told to be Rudali and Rikhraj. Both of them are sons of Tulsi. Bodhraj was also told to be real brother of these two persons, namely, Rudali and Rikhraj. In Khata No. 73 and 363 at the time, it was told that Udairaj, Ram Kuber sons of Shree and Ram Milan son of Lautan were co -tenants. In Khata No. 164, it was told that Rikhraj, Bodhraj sons of Tulsi and Ram Milan son of Lautan were co -sharers. Udairaj and Ram Kuber sons of Shree laid their claim to khata Nos. 73 and 363 as their ancestral property and claimed it to be joint property, meaning thereby they claim themselves to be co -sharers. Ram Milan son of Lautan laid his claim as joint tenancy over these three plots alleging that they were acquired by their ancestors. Bodhraj and Rikhraj with respect to plot Nos. 1102, 1103, 1106, 1107, 1108, and 2335, on the basis of adverse possession, claimed themselves to be Sirdars.

(3.) THE Assistant Settlement Officer of Consolidation by his judgment dated 28.8.1976 held that over Khata No. 73 Udairaj and others have no claim and it was held that Khata No. 73 was exclusively owned by Tulsi, father of Bodhraj. Bodhraj's appeal with respect to Khata No. 363 was dismissed. Similarly the appeal of Udairaj, Ram Kuber and Ram Milan with respect to Khata Nos. 73 and 164 was dismissed. With respect to plot No. 987/2 the appeal of Udairaj and others was allowed. Aggrieved against that order the parties went in revision before the Joint Director of Consolidation. He by his judgment dated 28.9.1979 dismissed the revision of Ram Milan, Ram Kuber and Udairaj and allowed the revision of Bodhraj with respect to Plot No. 987/2 of Khata No. 363 only and it was ordered that this plot shall remain entered in the names of Bodhraj son of Tulsi and Ram Newal and Ram Piyare sons of Rikhraj. Aggrieved against this order the present two writ petitions have been filed.