JAGIRI LAL Vs. HEM RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revison petition under Section 17 of H.P. Land Revenue Act preferred by Shri Jagiri Lal and Kashmiri Lal both sons of shri Haria residents of village Rampur Majri. Tehsil Paonta Sahib, distt. Sirmaur. is directed against the order dated 16.02 -2001 passed by Collector, Distt. Sirmaur in a case No.07.10 of 2000 whereby the revison petition of the petitioner was dismissed.

(2.) The facts of the case briefly stated are that the present petitioners submitted an application to the Assistant Collector 1st Grade Paonta Sahib on 17.06.1998 for partition of land comprised in Khata/Khatauni No.86/153 to 156. kitas 2 measuring 40 -18 Bighas. situated in Mauza Rampur -Majri. Tehsil Paonta Sahib, jointly held by both the parties. The Assistant Collector 1st Grade forwarded to the application to Assistant Collector. Ilnd grade Poanta for scrutiny and proposing of mode of partition. The Assistant Collector Ilnd Grade after hearing both the parties returned the case to the Assistant Collector 1st Grade Paonta Sahib vide order dated 04.01.1999 with the observations that a question of title was involved in the matter which was not in his jurisdiction to decide. The Assistant Collector 1st Grade Paonta Sahib called the parties on 18.01.1999 and directed them that they should first get the question of title decided by the competent Civil Court and then to file the application for partition of land in dispute before him accordingly. Against this order dated 18.01.1999 of the Assistant Collector 1st Grade Paonta Sahib. Shri Jagiri Lal and Kashmiri Lal filed appeal before the sub -divisonal Collector. Poanta Sahib on the grounds that the learned Assistant Collector 1st Grade after receiving the case file from the Assistant Collector Ilnd Grade had not heard the parties on the point of question of title and dismissed the same in a summary way and the learned trial Court had not even considered the revenue entries as incorporated in the Jamabandi for the year 1995 -96 which carried the presumption of truth by virtue of which the present petitioners were recorded as co -owners in possesison of the impugned land to the extent of 5/12 shares.

(3.) The learned Collector Poanta Sahib, Sub -division after hearing the arguments advanced by the learned counsels of both the parties and going through the record, concluded that the issue with regard to question of title was not yet decided by the competent Civil Court, therefore Revenue Officers could not go ahead with the partition proceedings until and unless the same is decided, dismissed the appeal on this score vide order dated 29.12.1999.