RAJALAL Vs. KOMAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners by invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution has challenged the order of Additional Commissioner, Gwalior dated 25.06.2010 (Annexure P/2) and also the order of Board of Revenue (Board) dated 03.04.2012 (Annexure P/1).

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that the land at survey No. 211/1 situated in village Barkheda, Tehsil and District Ashok Nagar was owned by Janak Singh. Janak Singh was the "Bhoomiswami" of the said land. Janak Singh was unmarried and therefore, had no issues. It is projected that Chhogi Lal, father of the present petitioners, was residing with said Shri Janak Singh. Chhogi Lal was taking care of Janak Singh, therefore, Janak Singh executed a will dated 26.01.1998 in favour of Chhogi Lal. After the death of Janak Lal, Chhogi Lal prefered an application for mutation on the basis of said will. The application was preferred before the Gram Panchayat. The Gram Panchayat by its resolution No. 1/25.02.2004 sent the matter to Tehsil Court. Application was sent to Tehsil Court because the mutation was disputed. At this stage, Chhogi Lal preferred second application before Tehsildar which was registered as case No. 14 /A -6/ 2003 -04. It is contended by Shri B.S. Dhakad, learned counsel for the petitioner that on this application, advertisement was issued and objections were invited. In turn, respondents No. 1 & 2 submitted their objections.

(3.) THE respondents assailed the order of SDO by preferring second appeal before Additional Commissioner (Revenue), Gwalior Division. This second appeal was registered as case No. 376 / 05 -06/ Appeal. During the pendency of said appeal, the original applicant, father of the present petitioners, Chhogi Lal expired. The respondents herein impleaded the present petitioners as legal representatives in the said appeal which was pending at the relevant point of time before Additional Commissioner. Additional Commissioner by order dated 25.06.2010 allowed the appeal and set aside the orders of the courts below and remitted the matter back with certain directions. The present petitioners preferred a revision before the Board which was registered as case No. 999 -2/2010. Board, by order dated 03.04.2012 rejected the revision and confirmed the order of the Additional Commissioner. Order of Additional Commissioner and the Board, aforesaid, are called in question in the present petition.