RAM SURAT RAM (MAURYA), J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Puneet Kumar Shukla, for the petitioners and Standing Counsel, for State of U.P. and Sri B.L. Verma, for respondents -5 to 7.
(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed against the orders of Tahsildar dated 26.12.2011, Deputy Collector dated 29.07.2013 and Board of Revenue, U.P., dated 18.12.2013, allowing the mutation application of Smt. Kalawati, Smt. Sumitra and Smt. Indu (respondents -5 to 7) (hereinafter referred to as the respondents) and deleting the entry of the names of the petitioners dated 31.05.1991, made on the basis of the report on PA -11 -A, from the land in dispute and dismissing the appeal and the revision of the petitioners against the aforesaid order, in the mutation proceeding under Section 34 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').
(3.) THE dispute relates to the inheritance of Ram Bahal son of Hubraj, who died in May 1991. Kalawati (respondent -5) filed an application on 11.06.1991, for mutation of the names of the respondents on the basis of registered will dated 29.08.1984 executed by Ram Bahal in their favour and for deleting the entry of the names of the petitioners dated 31.05.1991, made on the report of PA -11 -A by Revenue Inspector. The petitioners also filed an application on 22.08.1991, for mutation of their names on the basis of unregistered will dated 06.05.1991 allegedly executed by Ram Bahal in their favour. Earlier, Tahsildar by order dated 28.05.1995 allowed the mutation application of the respondents and dismissed mutation application of the petitioners. The petitioners filed an appeal from the aforesaid order which was allowed by Sub -Divisional Officer, by order dated 28.05.2002 and the matter was remanded to Tahsildar for fresh decision after hearing the parties. The respondents filed a revision against the aforesaid order which was dismissed by Additional Commissioner on 18.01.2007. After remand the matter was again heard by Tahsildar, who by his order dated 26.12.2011 found that due execution of registered will dated 29.08.1984 was proved by its attesting witnesses Ram Jiyawan and Bamb Bahadur. Otherwise also its execution was admitted from the own documents of the petitioners. The petitioners examined Satya Narain Singh and Indrajeet Singh to prove due execution of the unregistered will dated 06.05.1991, who were residents of another district. In the mutation application, the petitioners have mentioned only three plots while Ram Bahal had other plots also. The petitioners are taking two stand namely claiming themselves as heir under Section 171 of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951 and also claiming right under unregistered will. Amar Nath in his statement has stated that Ram Bahal has not executed any will and sale deed even then unregistered will dated 06.05.1991 has been produced as such the will set by the petitioners is highly suspicious documents.;