CHHITAR LAL Vs. CHHOTU LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD on the question of admission and stay. The intra -court appeal has been preferred as against the order dated 31.7.2012 passed by the Single Bench dismissing the writ petition affirming the order passed by the Board of Revenue on 23.5.2012.

(2.) THE plaintiff -respondent Chhotu Lal filed revenue suit before the SDO, Khanpur, District Jhalawar. He claimed the right on the basis of gift -deed executed by Harku Bai. It was submitted by the plaintiff that Harku Bai was khatedar of 22 bigha, 12 biswa of land. She had four daughters namely Dhanni Bai, Pana Bai, Jana Bai and Kanya Bai. The plaintiff Chhotu Lal lived with Harku Bai and took care of her. Harku Bai executed a gift -deed on 28.4.1972 which was duly registered. On execution of gift -deed, plaintiff Chhotu Lal was placed in possession of the land. Mutation was also made in favour of Chhotu Lal on 5.7.1974. In the course of settlement proceeding, name of Harku Bai was wrongly entered ignoring the mutation made in favour of Chhotu lal. Taking advantage of wrong entry made in the revenue records in favour of Harku Bai which was made ignoring the mutation already made in favour of Chhotu Lal, mutation was obtained in surreptitious manner in the name of Chhitar Lal and two daughters of Harku Bai namely Jana Bai and Kanya Bai on 4.8.1978. The Gram Panchayat did not notice the mutation which was already made in favour of Chhotu Lal on 5.7.1974 on the basis of gift deed dated 28.4.1972. There was dispute with respect to possession of the land in dispute between Chhitar Lal and Chhotu Lal which entailed proceedings under Sections 145 and 116 Cr. P.C. in which order was passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Aklera that the plaintiff Chhotu Lal was in possession of the land in dispute and possession was ordered to be restored to him from the receiver appointed temporarily in the proceedings under Section 145 Cr. P.C. During pendency of the suit filed by Chhotu Lal against Chhitar Lal and others, defendant Chhitar Lal sold the land in dispute by way of registered sale deed dated 21.3.1997 to Ramesh Chand and Madanlal. They were impleaded as co -defendants in the suit by the plaintiff Chhotu Lal.

(3.) THE SDO held that Harku Bai was khatedar of the land in question. She executed gift deed on 28.4.1972 and plaintiff Chhotu Lal was placed in possession of the gifted property. The SDO held the mutation made in favour of defendant Chhitar Lal on 4.8.1978 to be without any legal foundation as mutation had already been made in favour of Chhotu Lal on 5.7.1974 consequent to gift deed dated 28.4.1972; Harku Bai was not the owner of the land in dispute on the date on which mutation was made by the Gram Panchayat in her place in favour of defendant Chhitar Lal and others; order dated 11.4.1986 under Section 145 Cr. P.C. has attained finality as revision preferred against the order was dismissed by the Sessions Judge vide order dated 4.11.1987. The suit was decreed by the SDO vide judgment dated 5.7.2006 aggrieved thereby, appeal was preferred before the Revenue Appellate Authority. The Revenue Appellate Authority vide judgment dated 11.6.2007 held that execution of registered gift deed was not proved in accordance with the provisions contained under Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and reversed the decision of the SDO. Against the decision of the Revenue Appellate Authority, appeal was preferred before the Board of Revenue. The appeal was allowed and judgment of the SDO was restored by the Board of Revenue vide judgment dated 23.5.2012 aggrieved thereby, writ petition was preferred before the Single Bench. The Single Bench dismissed the writ petition with cost of Rs. 50,000/ -imposed upon the defendant -appellant out of which, Rs. 25,000/ - was ordered to be paid to the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority and remainder to the plaintiff -respondent Chhotu Lal. Aggrieved by the order dated 31.7.2012 passed by the Single Bench, intra -court appeal has been preferred by the defendant -appellant Chhitar Lal.