RAM KALI (SMT.) Vs. ATAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Smt. Ram Kali has filed this revision against the order dated 2.3.1998 passed by learned Additional Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record carefully.

(3.) The sale-deed dated 10.2.1981 was executed by Smt. Chandri in respect of the entire land in question. The said sale-deed was taken to be hit by Sec. 168-A of the Act and does not hold good because Smt. Chandri was not competent to transfer the entire holding. The holding was recorded in the name of Smt. Chandri along with other co-tenure holders. Hence the mutation too was denied on this ground but the sale-deed dated 25.1.1985 which was executed by all the co-tenure holders will not be hit by the provisions of Sec. 168-A of the Act because the entire holding has been transferred in the name of Smt. Ram Kali and mutation too has been allowed. The sale-deed on the basis of which mutation has been allowed, proceeding under Sec. 168-A of the Z.A. and L.R. Act cannot be drawn against any body. The sale-deed on the basis of which Smt. Ram Kali is claiming right cannot be said to be hit by the provisions of Sec. 168-A of the Act because the entire holding has been transferred by Smt. Chandri. The observation made by both the courts below needs interference.