HASMAT KHAN S/O HURMAT KHAN AND OTHERS Vs. DISTRICT DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION
LAWS(UTN)-2013-7-196
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on July 25,2013

Hasmat Khan S/O Hurmat Khan And Others Appellant
VERSUS
DISTRICT DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) By means of this petition the petitioners have sought a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the judgment and order dated 4- 2-2000 passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation Udham Singh Nagar in revision No. 52/265 of 1996-97 and the order dated 9-3- 1991 passed by Settlement Officer, Consolidation in appeal, contained in Annexure No.3 and 2 respectively.
(2.) Brief facts of the case according to petitioners are that the petitioners are the Bhumidhars with transferable rights in possession of the property in dispute. The objection U/S 9-A of Consolidation of Holdings Act has been filed by the respondent No.4 Indra Singh on the ground that he is in adverse possession over the land in dispute since more than 12 years and his rights are matured. Both the parties have adduced their evidence before the Consolidation Officer. The learned Consolidation Officer after examining the Khasra of 12 years recorded a finding that the rights of respondents have not matured since the entry there is no continuous entry in the Khasra and the rights only matures in the situation when the continuous possession is proved. Accordingly the objection was dismissed by the Consolidation Officer vide order dated 24.7.1990. Aggrieved by the order of Consolidation Officer, the respondent No.4 Indra Singh preferred appeal No. 451 Indra Singh vs. Alyar Khan and others before the Settlement Officer Consolidation. The learned S.O.C. vide impugned order dated 9-3-1991 allowed the appeal. The learned S.O.C. has given a finding that the right of the appellant has been perfected as he is in possession since last 12 years from 1374 Fasli onwards 1387 Fasli. But at the same time finding has been given that there is no entry of possession in Khasra 1381, 1383 and 1385 Fasli and assuming the possession in those years also that he cannot be deprived if there is no entry in Khasra. Further name of Hurmat Khan is recorded in column No.4 of Khasra and set aside the order of Consolidation Officer.
(3.) Aggrieved by the order passed by SOC the revision No. 52/265 of 1996-97 was preferred. The learned D.D.C. affirmed the finding of SOC on one more ground that since respondent No.4 was in possession in 1374 Fasli and he has perfected his hereditary rights since no suit has been filed against respondent No.4, by the tenure holders and thereafter after coming into force of Z.A. and L. R. Act no proceeding has been initiated within time. Therefore, his rights have been perfected and also affirmed the finding of 12 years possession.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.