PARVATIYA Vs. D.D.C.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the counsel for the parties.

(2.) The dispute in the present writ petition as well as in the consolidation proceedings from which the present writ petition arises relates to Plot Nos. 29, 161, 1113, 1367 in Khata No.45. The petitioner claims her half share in the disputed plots and admits the half share of respondent no.4 in the same. The claim of respondent no. 4 is that his share in the disputed plot is 3/4. The claim of the parties is based on the different pedigrees submitted by them before the courts below.

(3.) It appears that one Punni was the original tenure holder of the disputed plots. Both the parties admit that Punni had two sons, Gulzar and Faqir. The petitioner alleges that Jhunkhun was the son of Gulzar and Bakhat was the son of Jhunkhun. It is further stated that Doodnath was the son of Bakhat and Lalji was the son of Doodnath. Mahdeiya, was the the wife of Doodnath and petitioner claims herself to be the widow of Lalji. The pedigree submitted by respondent no. 4 is that Punni had two sons Gulzar and Faqir. Gulzar had three sons while Faqir had two sons namely Revti and Jhunkhun. Subhagia was the daughter-in-law of Revti. The decendant of Jhunkhun stated by respondent no.4 are the same as those stated by the petitioner. The claim of respondent no. 4 in the disputed plots is based on the sale deed dated 15.7.1952 jointly executed by Subhagia and the descendant of Gulzar as described by respondent no. 4.