Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner. In respect of certain plots the name of Lal Ji, son of Ram Deo was recorded. Respondent no. 5 Lalla Ram, son of Ram Deo filed an application under Section 33/39 stating that in the revenue records the name of Lal Ji is wrongly entered and his actual name is Lalla Ram. On the said application case no. 41 under Section 33/39 was registered and after getting the report from the Tehsildar an order was passed by the Up Zila Adhikari on 11.3.2011 to correct the name of respondent no. 5 as Lalla Ram, son of Ram Deo in place of Lal Ji, son of Ram Deo.
(2.) AGGRIEVED by the said order petitioner filed revision which has been dismissed vide order dated 17.10.2011. It is contended that a suit for partition under Section 176 of the Act between the parties is pending therefore, mutation/correction should await its decision.
(3.) ADMITTEDLY , the name of Lal Ji, son of Ram Deo was appearing in the revenue records. The said name has been deleted and has been corrected to Lalla Ram. Petitioner is not the person aggrieved by the said order. In case, any one is aggrieved by it, he is Lal Ji and no one else.;