DEVINDER KAUR Vs. JASWANT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present case has been reported by Mrs. Harsimrat Gill, IAS, Commissioner (Appeals), Jalandhar Division at Chandigarh, under Section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, with her opinion that the order dated 31.3.1989, passed by the Collector Batala, as well as, the order dated 11.2.1989, passed by the A.C. IInd Grade, Batala be set aside, by accepting the present revision petition, and the case be remanded to the A.C. Ist Grade, Batala, for fresh decision, after detailed enquiry, in connection with mutation No. 373 of villages Shahbad, Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur, as per the reference dated 22.7.1991.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the both the parties have been heard. After careful consideration of the facts and circumstance of the case, and after thorough perusal of the record, I am of the view, that the present revision petition needs to be accepted and the orders impugned merit to be set aside.

(3.) AGAINST the order of the A.C. II dated 11.2.1989, Devinder Kaur filed the appeal before the Collector, Batala, which was rejected, as per Collector's order dated 31.3.1989. In her appeal Devinder Kaur had alleged, that she being the legal heir of the deceased Jagjit Singh, was not summoned by the A.C. II Batala, at the time of sanctioning of the mutation, regarding the inheritance of Jagjit Singh; and the said mutation had been sanctioned in the name of Jaswant Singh also, who had already died, since he died on 31.7.1987; and she herself was in possession of an un-registered will dated 17.9.87, which was executed by her father, the testator Jagjit Singh. She had prayed that the order of the A.C. II be set aside, and the case be remanded for fresh decision, by providing her an opportunity of being heard, as well as to allow her to prove the un-registered will in her favour. The Collector, Batala did not find any merit in it and rejected the same. Aggrieved by this order of the Collector, Batala, Devinder Kaur filed the revision petition before the Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, as a result of which the present case has been reported by the Commissioner (Appeals), Jalandhar Division, as per the reference dated 22.7.1991.