LAWS(J&K)-2009-4-69

PAWAN GUPTA Vs. JOINT FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

Decided On April 09, 2009
PAWAN GUPTA Appellant
V/S
Joint Financial Commissioner Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE land measuring 05 Kanals and 10 Marias covered by Survey No. 416, Khewat No. 26, situated at village tope Sherkhanian, Jammu owned by Daya Singh and Ors, is stated to have been sold vide 02 Sale deed. One shown to have been executed on 14 -09 -1982 and registered on the same date in favour of Sh. Krishan Lal, another is shown to have been executed on 20.09.1982 and registered on 14.10.1982 in favour of Vachaspati. Both of them are dead, so are survived by respondents No. 11 to 16, the legal heirs of Krishan Lal are shown to have executed a Sale deed on 03 -03 -2000 for land measuring 03 Kanals and 06 Marias in favour of Pawan Gupta, (the petitioner) and by another sale deed shown to have been executed by Vachaspati on 03 -03 -2000 for land measuring 02 Kanals and 04 Marias are sold in favour of the petitioner. Based on the first two Sale Deeds executed in the year 1982 in favour of Krishan Lal and Vachaspati, Mutation No. 7375 and 7392 have been attested on 19.12.1999. Mutations regarding subsequent Sale Deeds in favour of the petitioner bearing No. 7487 and 7482 have been attested on 26 -04 -2000. All the said Mutations have been challenged before the Financial Commissioner by the medium of two separate revision petitions. Ld. Financial Commissioner has set aside the mutation orders opining therein that the said orders are illegal, defective and without jurisdiction.

(2.) PETITIONER aggrieved by the said order passed by the Financial Commissioner has invoked the Writ jurisdiction.

(3.) SECONDLY contended that the mutation orders attested in his favour based on the 02 Sale deeds were perfectly justified. The petitioner had purchased the land in question regarding which two proper Sale deeds have been executed and properly registered, so have been reflected in the revenue records, by means of attestation of mutations. There was nothing wrong which would warrant interference in revision by the Financial Commissioner.