- (1.) Heard Shri V.K. S. Chaudhary, learned senior counsel for the Petitioners.
(2.) Parvat, Vikramjeet and Mahadeo were brothers. The dispute in the present writ petition relates to the share of Parvat. Smt. Kasturia, Respondent No. 2 since deceased filed objections under Section 9 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act claiming the share of Parvat. The objections were filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation. The Consolidation Officer by order dated 11.10.1971, Annexure-1 to the writ petition, rejected the application for condoning the delay. Appeal against the order preferred to Smt. Kasturia before the Settlement Officer, Consolidation was also dismissed on the ground that it was not maintainable as what had been decided by the Consolidation Officer was only an application for condonation of delay. The Revision filed by Smt. Kasturia has been allowed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation by the impugned order dated 21.12.1972 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition).
(3.) The Consolidation Officer relied upon the statement of Smt. Kasturia made before him that she had knowledge about the case between Balgovind son of Mahadeo and Respondent Nos. 3 to 6 and her case that she had no knowledge about the proceedings was false. The Deputy Director of Consolidation has allowed the revision and has set aside the order of the Consolidation Officer with direction to decide the case on merits. The finding is that Smt. Kasturia is the daughter of Parvat and prima facie she has title to the property and it was necessary in the interest of justice to provide her opportunity of hearing.;