BHARAT SUMAN Vs. PADAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ appeal under Section 2(1) of Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya Ko Appeal Adhiniyam, 2005, has been filed against the order dated 28.8.2017 passed in Review Petition No. 956/2019, whereby the order dated 20.6.2019 passed in Misc. Petition No. 2072/2019 has been partly modified.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the concurrent orders were passed by the Additional Commissioner and Board of Revenue allowing the mutation of names of all legal representatives ignoring the registered Will. This Court vide order dated 20.6.2019 in Misc. Petition No. 2072/2019 relying on the judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court passed in Civil Writ Petition No. 3821/2011 (Rajinder Singh & Anr. vs. Financial Commissioner), held that validity of the Will can be decided by the Civil Court which has exclusive domain over the matter and this issue cannot be decided by the Revenue Court and set aside the orders passed by the Additional Commissioner and Board of Revenue, against which, review petition was filed by the respondents. In Review Petition No. 956/2019, learned Single Judge vide order dated 22.8.2019 modified the order dated 20.6.2019 passed in Misc. Petition No. 2072/2019 in the following manner :-

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant, who was petitioner in Misc. Petition No.2072/2019, attacks the impugned order dated 22.8.2019 on the ground that the order is passed against the scope of review and without issuing notices to other respondents. Once this Court has found that the validity of the will can be decided by the civil court and revenue authority has no right to decide the same, the orders passed by Additional Commissioner and Board of Revenue were rightly set aside. In the order dated 20.6.2019 passed in misc. petition, there was no error apparent on the face of the record. It has also been urged that if learned Single Judge was of the view that there were some mistakes in the order dated 20.6.2019 then the misc. petition should be directed to be heard afresh but this aspect has not been taken into consideration while passing the impugned order, therefore, prayed for setting aside the impugned order passed in review petition.