SURAM CHAND Vs. STATE & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant and re-spondent No.5 claim the property of deceased Balak Ram and his wife, one as a natural heir and the other as an adopted daughter. An adoption deed is stated to have been executed by Balak Ram in favour of respondent No.5, which fact stands affirmed by the civil Court, which has passed a decree in favour of the said respondent. The said decree has been challenged by the appellant in a civil suit filed before the trial Court on the ground that it has been obtained by collusion, misrepresen-tation, fraud and coercion. The appellant has claimed that he is the absolute owner of the property in dispute. A prayer for permanent injunction has also been sought against re-spondent No.5, restraining her from interfer-ing in the possession of the said property. That suit is subjudice before the trial Court.

(2.) In collateral proceedings, mutations at-tested in favour of the appellant by the Tehsildar, were questioned by respondent No.5 before the respondent No.3 Additional Deputy Commissioner, Udhampur, who vide his orders dt. 18th of Sept 2004, set aside the mutations. Aggrieved by these orders, an appeal was preferred before the respondent No.2 Settlement Commissioner, Jammu. The said respondent after hearing the parties, dis-missed the appeal vide order dt. 17th of Aug 2005, and directed the Tehsildar concerned to attest the mutations in favour of the parties in equal shares. The aforementioned or-der came to be challenged in the writ peti-tion, which stands dismissed by a learned Single Judge of this Court vide order im-pugned dt. 30th of June 2008. It is this order which is impugned in the present appeal be-fore us.

(3.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties.