- (1.) HEARD Sri P.S. Chauhan, for the petitioners.
(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed against the judgments of Assistant Collector dated 24.07.1997, passing preliminary decree and holding Smt. Jameela Begum (respondent -4) is co -sharer of 1/2 share in the land in dispute in Suit No. 22/103 of 1993, under Section 176 of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), Additional Commissioner dated 29.01.1998 and Board of Revenue, U.P., dated 04.09.2014, dismissing the appeal and second appeal of the petitioners against the aforesaid decree.
(3.) SMT . Jameela Begum (respondent -4) filed a suit for partition of 1/2 share in plot 20 (area 1.782 hectare) of village Hasanpur Kadeem, tahsil and district Meerut, on the basis of sale deed dated 12.02.1993 executed by Smt. Shakuntala in her favour. It has been stated in the plaint that Narayan Singh and Rajpal Singh were co -sharers in the land in dispute having equal share. Rajpal Singh died issueless and after his death of his 1/2 share was inherited by his widow Smt. Shakuntala. Smt. Shakuntala executed a registered sale deed dated 12.02.1993, in respect of her entire share in the land in dispute in favour of respondent -4 and her name was also mutated in the revenue records by the order of Naib Tahsildar dated 19.03.1993. The suit was contested by Narayan Singh (now represented by the petitioners), who filed his written statement and denied plaint allegations. It has been stated in additional plea that sale deed dated 12.02.1993 was obtained by committing fraud on Smt. Shakuntala and without paying any sale consideration. On coming to know about the sale deed, Smt. Shakuntala filed O.S. No. 641 of 1993 for cancellation of the sale deed in Civil Court. The partition suit is liable to be stayed under Section 10 C.P.C. exparte order of mutation dated 19.03.1993 has been set aside by Sub -Divisional Officer, in appeal, by order dated 24.09.1993 and the matter has been remanded to Naib -Tahsildar for deciding mutation application afresh as such she was not a recorded tenure holder and under the law suit for partition filed by her was not maintainable. Smt. Shakuntala was not impleaded as the party in the suit as such, the suit was not maintainable.;