(1.) CHALLENGE is with regard to the order passed by the Commissioner of Consolidation the revisional authority under the Orissa Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) reversing the orders passed by the original and the appellate authority namely, the Consolidation Officer and the Deputy Director by the present writ petitioner
(2.) THE facts which emerge from the averments in the writ application are that one Sagar Panda was the common ancestor and after his death, his two sons Nidhi and Chakradhar became the owners in possession over the disputed properties, appertaining to C. S. Plot Nos. 1087, 1784, 1703, 2057, 2092, 2565, 2094 and 1734. They were amicably separated and there wars severance of status. Chakradhar died issueless leaving behind his wife Saria. Nidhi died leaving his son Bansi. Sundari is the only survivor from Bansi's branch. Chakradhar had expired prior to 1928, and as there was already severance of joint family status, name of Saria was recorded in 1928 settlement of record -of -rights as she had 8 annas interest in the property .By virtue of a registered sale deed dated 6 -1 -1965, she transferred the disputed properties and delivered possession thereof to the present petitioner. The petitioner in his turn had sold a portion of the suit properties to Gouranga Panda, the son of opp. party No, 1.
(3.) NOW , Sub -section (2) of Section 14 provides that nothing contained in Sub -section (1) shall apply to any property acquired by way of gift or under a will or any other instrument or under a decree or order of a Civil Court or under an award where the terms of the gift, will or other instrument or the decree order or award prescribe a restricted estate in such property.This provision is more in the nature of a proviso or exception to Sub -section (1) and it was regarded as such by this Court in Badri Pershad v. Smt. Kanso Devi (1970) 2 SCR 95 : (AIR 1970) SC 1963).....',