KULWANT KAUR Vs. SURJIT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 against the order dated 11-8-09 of the Commissioner (Appeals). Jalandhar Division passed in the course of mutation proceedings.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that Mutation No. 1051 of village Birowal, Tehsil and District SBS Nagar relating to the inheritance of Puran Singh @ Charan Singh was entered in favour of the petitioners on the basis of a registered will dated 20.2.1995 in their favour. The mutation having become contested the Assistant Collector Grade-I sanctioned it in favour of the petitioners and the respondent on the basis of natural inheritance. An appeal and revision against this order were dismissed by the Collector and the Commissioner respectively; but the Financial Commissioner in ROR No. 857/05 set aside these orders and remanded the matter back to the Commissioner to examine it in the light of order dated 7-8-03 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), S.B.S. Nagar. Acting on the basis of this order, the Commissioner (Appeals), Jalandhar Division again upheld the sanctioning of mutation in favour of the petitioners and the respondent on the basis of natural inheritance, leading to the present petition.

(3.) I have carefully considered these arguments and perused the record of the case. It is seen that in his order dated 14-10-02, the Assistant Collector Grade-I sanctioned the mutation in favour of the petitioner No. 1 and the respondent on the basis of natural inheritance being the daughter and widow of the deceased, respectively. This order has been upheld upto the level of the Commissioner. However, I find that the Commissioner, Jalandhar Division did not take due and adequate note of the civil court order dated 7-8-03 in his order. The civil suit in question had been filed by the respondent and one of the issues framed therein was whether there was any relationship of husband and wife between the respondent Harjit Kaur and the deceased Charan Singh. This suit was dismissed on 7-8-03; and it, therefore, has to be held that the relationship of husband and wife has not been proved. Civil Court findings are binding upon the Revenue Officers, and it is, therefore, to be held that respondent is not a natural heir of the deceased. No challenge to the execution of the will dated 20-2-95 in favour of the petitioners has been raised. It is also the settled legal position that revenue officers should generally act as per the terms of aregistered document. leaving the aggrieved party to seek redress in a civil court.