SHIV BAKSH SINGH Vs. DEV NATH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Saima Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Arjun Singh learned counsel for opposite party no. 1.

(2.) Opposite party no. 2 was issued notice through registered post as well as through the District Judge Gonda. The registered notice has come back undelivered whereas notice through District Judge is reported to have been returned with the remark of refusal. In these circumstances, notice to respondent no. 2 is deemed sufficient. It is to be noted that opposite party no. 2 did not participate in the proceedings before the court below.

(3.) Property in dispute is admittedly an agricultural property. The name of the petitioner was entered in the khatauni way back in the year 1993 consequent upon the death of one Raj Kumar on the basis of report in form PA-11 which is an annual report of succession submitted by supervisor kanungo.