LAWS(HPH)-2006-4-45

CHANDER GUPTA Vs. ANIL KUMAR

Decided On April 18, 2006
CHANDER GUPTA Appellant
V/S
ANIL KUMAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been preferred by Shri Chander Gupta,1! petitioner under Section 17 of the H.P. land Revenue Act, 1954 against order| dated 30.12.1996 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Kangra in revision petition No. 121/94 who dismissed the same and upheld orders passed by the courts below.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that Shri Anil Kumar present respondent was recorded as non -occupancy tenant under Shri Chander Gupta, the present petitioner. The settlement operations in this area were in progress and the settlement field staff entered the mutation No.4228 of Village Gagret, Tehsil Amb and put up the same before the Revenue Officer or attestation. The learned Assistant Collector llnd Grade attested the same in 24.9.1987 in the village where the land in question is situated and conferred the proprietary rights in favour of Anil Kumar, respondent under the H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act.

(3.) Aggrieved by this order the present petitioner filed an appeal before the Settlement Collector, Una who dismissed the same vide his order dated 18.2.1994. Dis -satisfied by the order of Settlement Collector, the petitioner challenged the same before then Divisional Commissioner Kangra Division who also dismissed the petition of the present petitioner and upheld the orders passed by both the courts below. Hence, this revision petition has come before us on the following grounds: - I. The courts below was in grave error by not deciding the matter on facts as raised by the petitioner -before the court of Assistant Settlement Officer, Una who had wrongly dismissed the appeal of the petitioner on the ground of limitation on the one hand and on the other decided that the entries as made by the Assistant Collector llnd Grade in favour of the respondent are proper. The Court below failed to take cognizance of the fact that the petitioner had filed an application for condonation of delay which was not decided by the appellate authority before deciding the case on merits.