Rajiv Sharma, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. Prateek Sinha, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.
(2.) THE instant writ petition arises out of the proceedings initiated under Section 34 Land Revenue Act. The Petitioner is the tenure holder of the property in question and the same has been mortgaged in favour of Bank of India, Lalpur Branch. After the said mortgage, a registered power of attorney was executed in favour of his son, namely, Islam, who in turn, on the basis of the said power of attorney sold the property to the opposite party No. 5 by means of registered sale deed. While executing the sale deed, Islam has specifically stated that the land in question is free from all encumbrances. Therefore, he did not disclose that the property is mortgaged against which a loan of Rs. 3 lakhs is outstanding.
(3.) SUBSEQUENTLY , the Tahsildar passed the impugned order dated 26.7.2010 under Section 34 of Land Revenue act, without considering the truthfulness of Power of Attorney and the sale deed executed by Islam in favour of his wife. Being aggrieved, the Petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 210 of Land Revenue Act before the Sub -Divisional Magistrate, Hapur, District Ghaziabad, which was rejected by the impugned order dated 19.11.2010. Thereafter, he filed a revision under Section 219 before the Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut, which too was rejected by the judgment and order dated 2.2.2011.;