TEJ BAHADUR SINGH Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Short counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 3 to 9, is taken on record.

(2.) Since a very short question in this matter, which does not touch the merit of respective substantial claims of the parties, is involved, hence with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the Court proceeds to decide the matter finally at the admission stage itself.

(3.) The land in dispute was recorded in the names of Sekhai, Mahavir, Ram Bachan, Ram Sundar, Ashok Kumar and Ram Dulari in the basic year khatauni. The case set up by the respondent Nos. 3 to 9 is that through various sale deeds executed by the aforesaid persons in the year 2001, 2002, 2011 and 2012 etc., the land in dispute was transferred to the respondent Nos. 3 to 9 and on the basis of valid transfers the respondent Nos. 3 to 9 had moved an application under Sec. 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act for getting their names mutated. It is also on record that against the said mutation applications moved by the respondent Nos. 3 to 9, the petitioner had filed objections denying the title of the vendors of the respondent Nos. 3 to 9, who were said to have executed the sale deeds in their favour. However, before proceedings under Sec. 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act could culminate in some final decision or order, the village in which the land in question is situated was notified under Sec. 4 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act and accordingly the proceedings of the said mutation case/cases were abated.