RAJDEO Vs. BASDEO AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Merun Dey holding brief of Sri A.N. Bhargava, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Radhey Shyam appearing for contesting respondent.

(2.) Dispute relates to Khata No. 7, area 5-15-14, situate in Village Mahimapur, Pargana Rampur, Tahsil Kunda, District Pratapgarh. The undisputed pedigree of the parties is as under;

(3.) In the basic year, khata in dispute was recorded in the name of opposite party No. 2/ Basdeo and Kedar Nath. During consolidation operation an objection under Sec. 9-A (2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, was filed by the petitioner on the allegation that khata in dispute is ancestral and on partition half share was given to the branch of petitioner and half share was given to the branch of Basdeo who sold his entire share to one Ram Prakash and others and as such his name was wrongly and fictitiously recorded which deserved to be quashed. Another set of objection was filed by respondent No. 2 claiming 1 /9th share in the disputed property on the allegation that the name of her husband was recorded over khata in dispute and after his death she was entitled to inherit his 1 /9th share.