JETHU SINGH Vs. BHANWAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these petitions involve identical questions of law and facts and, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) THE facts and circumstances giving rise to these cases are that one Sugan Singh was having agricultural land but he did not have a male issue. He died of illness on 29.9.1991. Subsequent thereto, mutation in respect of the said agricultural land was entered in the name of petitioner Jethu Singh on the basis of adoption being his daughter's son, vide order dated 20.12.1991. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, five appeals were preferred against the said order of mutation by the contesting respondents Bhanwar Singh and Arjun Singh on the ground that Wills had been executed in their favour by Sugan Singh on 27.9.1991. The appellate authority rejected all the five appeal vide order dated 13.6.1995 observing that the mutation proceedings, being fiscal in nature, did not manifest title over the property and the matter should be adjudicated before the appropriate forum. Against the said order dated 13.6.1995, further appeals were filed before the Additional Commissioner (Colonization) cum Revenue Appellate Authority, which were allowed vide order dated 31.8.1996 on the ground that the matter of title was Sub -judice before the competent court and the issue of title can be decided therein. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, five revision petitions were filed by the present petitioner before the Board of Revenue, which were dismissed vide order dated 23.4.1998. Being aggrieved, petitioner further filed review petitions which have also been dismissed vide impugned order dated 30.12.2000. Hence these petitions.

(3.) ON the other hand, Mr. J.R. Beniwal, learned Counsel for the respondents has submitted that fiscal entries do not represent title and questions as to whether the Wills are genuine or forged and whether the adoption of the petitioner is in accordance with law and valid, are disputed questions of facts and the same cannot be determined in writ jurisdiction, nor the said issues can be determined in fiscal proceedings like that of mutation, therefore, the petitions are liable to be rejected.