SOLI BHAT Vs. TAJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this intra court appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment dtd. 19/7/2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in writ petition bearing WP(C) No. 1946/2022, whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant-petitioner, challenging the order dtd. 6/8/2022 passed by Commissioner Agrarian Reforms (Additional Deputy Commissioner), Budgam, whereby mutation No. 1080 under Sec. 4 and mutation No. 1108 under Sec. 8 of the Agrarian Reforms Act pertaining to the land measuring 13 kanals and 5 marlas encompassing Khasra No. 212 and 226 of estate Budgam Batpora have been set aside.

(2.) The appellant is the husband of respondent No. 2 whereas respondent Nos 1 and 3 are the daughters of Late Salam Dar (erstwhile owner of land measuring 13 kanals and 5 marlas encompassing Khasra No. 212 and 226 of estate Budgam Batpora) and sisters of respondent No. 2.

(3.) It is stated that the learned Commissioner has, without giving any plausible reason for codoning the delay of 35 years, passed the order dtd. 6/8/2022. The respondent No. 1 in her application for condonation of delay had taken contrary stands before the learned Commissioner inasmuch as at one place she had claimed that she got the knowledge of the mutations when the appellant declared that he is the sole owner of the property in question and at the other place she has stated that she had come to know about the mutations when she received a notice from the Court of District Judge, Budgam. It is further contended that the learned Commissioner erred in upholding the challenge of respondent No. 01 at an extremely belated stage when third party interest had been created in the property in question.