BIKRAM SINGH Vs. CHHAJJU SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is revision petition against the order of the Addl. Commissioner (Appeals), Patiala Division, Patiala dated 29.9.1999 vide which he rejected a revision petition filed by the present petitioners against the order of the Collector, Samrala dated 17.1.1991. Vide this order the Collector had rejected an appeal filed by the present petitioner against the order of the Assistant Collector, Ist Grade, Samrala dated 31.10.1990 vide which he had rejected the objections raised by the petitioner to the partition of land in question on the grounds that the same land had been partitioned earlier by the order of the Assistant Collector, Ist Grade dated 1.3.1976. The details of the same are contained in the orders of the lower revenue authorities and need not be gone into.

(2.) THE basic point in this case is whether if a joint holding has been partitioned earlier, and the partition proceedings have not been completed and the entry not been made in the revenue records, a fresh partition can be carried out on a subsequent date on the basis of a fresh application. In the present case the partition proceedings were commenced in respect of the present land in 1975, and vide order dated 1.3.1976 the Assistant Collector partitioned the land. However, the Sanad of partition was not prepared and the partition was not entered in the revenue records. The lower revenue authorities have held that in view of the non-completion of partition proceedings and their non-implementation in the revenue record, these proceedings are treated to have lapsed and cannot stand in the way of fresh partition proceedings.

(3.) ON behalf of the respondents it was argued that the so called partition of 1976 was no partition at all, since partition proceedings had not been taken to their logical end in the form of issue of Sanad, giving of possession and required change in the Jamabandi. It was correct that the Assistant Collector had passed an order dated 1.3.1976, but this partition order had never been implemented. As such, therefore, it could not stand any way in the way of these proceedings.