BHARPUR SINGH Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner seeks quashing of orders dated 29.4.2009 (P7) passed by the Financial Commissioner (respondent-1), dated 5.10.1999 (P5) passed by the Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala (respondent-2) and dated 30.6.1995 (P2) passed by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade Sangrur (respondent-4) in terms of which mutation of succession of Surjit Singh who died on 12.6.1994 has been sanctioned in favour of respondents-5 to 11 on the basis of natural succession by ignoring the registered Will dated 12/13.5.1994 (P1) in favour of the petitioner.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has contended that the Financial Commissioner has failed to take into consideration the various contentions raised with regard to the genuineness of the Will which are mentioned in the revision petition (P6). Therefore, it is submitted that the order passed by the Financial Commissioner is a non-speaking order and is liable to be set aside.