DHANNA Vs. NANUDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to challenge the correctness, validity and propriety of the orders dated 28.2.87 (Annexure 'J') passed by the SDO Ratlam in Revenue Case No. 122/A-23/85-86 and the appellate order dated 2.5.89 passed in Appellate Case No. 33/86-87 by the learned Collector Ratlam. By the orders impugned the Revenue Officers held that the petitioner is liable to return back the property to respondents Nanudi and Ramudi firstly because the transfer effected in favour of one Hiralal s/o Ambaramji was contrary to law and secondly because the present petitioner did not file the required information before the competent authority u/s 170B of the M.P. Land Revenue Code.

(2.) THE facts necessary for disposal of the present petition are that certain parcels of land were recorded in the name of one Walia S/o Dhanna. Though there is a serious dispute as to whether the land really belonged to Walia or was ancestral property in the hands of Walia as the land originally belonged to Dhanna, as said Walia died issueless he could only survive and his right could only be succeeded by Smt. Punibai w/o Dhanna (mother of deceased Walia) u/s 164 of the M.P. Land Revenue. Code as it then stood. According to section 164 it was mother if a widow was Class 4 successor while the sisters were falling under class 13; undisputedly the respondents No. 1 and 2 are the sisters of deceased Walia.

(3.) THE lands sold to Chunia were claimed by Hiralal in his occupancy rights inter alia pleading that as he was in possession under an agreement of lease and as the lease was running contrary to the provisions of Sec. 168 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code, he has acquired the rights of an occupancy tenant and consequently of Bhumiswami. On an application filed by Hiralal, land Survey Nos. 165, 166, 167 and 181 were declared to be in Bhumiswami rights of said Hiralal and on 31.3.70 his name was allowed to be mutated.