SAMANA Vs. D.D.C.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri R.C.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Arun Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent no.3. This writ petition has been filed challenging an order dated 21.01.2016 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Allahabad.

(2.) The facts of the case briefly stated are that the dispute herein relates to the land of Khata Nos.80 and 66 situated in village Mendara, pargana Nawabganj, Tehsil Soraon, District Allahabad which was admittedly recorded in the name of one Ram Saran. It appears that upon the death of Ram Saran, the land was ordered to be recorded in the name of Smt. Samana Devi, his widow. The orders regarding the two khatas were passed on 20.12.1988 and 24.12.1988, respectively. It appears that an application for correction under Section 42 -A of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act was filed on 31.10.1992 alleging that Smt. Samana Devi was not the widow of Ram Saran and was, in fact, his daughter.

(3.) The Consolidation Officer by his order dated 05.11.1992 allowed the correction application. Thereafter, Smt. Samana Devi daughter of Ram Saran executed a registered sale deed on 30.11.1992 in favour of Smt. Gujrati wife of Ram Kishor, respondent no.3. The respondent no.3 applied for mutation under Section 12 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act. The petitioner filed a restoration application on 15.01.1993 seeking recall of the order dated 05.11.1992. She also filed an objection to the mutation application. Her case was as she was the widow of Ram Saran and from their union, a daughter, namely Sudama Devi was born. Samna, the alleged daughter of Ram Saran is an imposter and that the correction application was wrongly and fraudulently filed and an exparte order was obtained thereon. The Consolidation Officer consolidated both the cases namely the restoration application of the petitioner as also the mutation application filed by the respondent no.3 and by a composite order dated 18.09.2003 dismissed the restoration application and ordered that the respondent no.3 be recorded over the land in question.