S.K. Singh, J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel who appears for the respondents.
(2.) Challenge in this petition is the judgment of the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 19th August, 1999 by which revision filed by the opposite parties has been allowed and judgment of the Settlement Officer Consolidation by which while allowing appeal of the petitioner delay in filing objection was condoned has been set aside.
(3.) Submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that Consolidation Officer in rejecting objection of the petitioner as barred by time has acted in arbitrary and perverse manner and in fact he has not recorded any finding disbelieving explanation so given in the affidavit, it is further submitted that the Consolidation Officer has not allowed any reasonable time to the petitioner to file rejoinder affidavit to tire counter affidavit filed by the opposite party in respect to the delay condonation matter it is submitted that the consolidation proceeding on being finalized attains finality to the rights of the parties on the facts discretion should have been exercised in favour of the petitioner for affording opportunity to both the parities and get their claim adjudicated on the merits and thus submission is that this Court should intervene in the matter in order to do substantial justice.;