Sri A.U. Khan , C.C.R.A. - (1.) The simple facts of revision have been exceedingly bitter contest: The dispute arose as respects devolution of patrimony amongst three brothers : Maheshwar Dayal, Trideshwar Dayal and Neel Kantheshwar Dayal. Neel Kantheshwar Dayal is dead and his widow Smt. Ramapati has joined in 14-9-1973 was a felicitous day; they had agreeably appointed an arbitrator to effectuate a partition of the inherence in a manner just and fair On 9-10 1973 the award came; it embitters relations more intensely than before till this day. Maheshwar Dayal pitted against Trideshwar Dayal and Neel Kanteshwar Dayal's widow. On 7-11-1973 the award is filed in civil Judges, Sitapur for being made a rule of the court. Since it was not to the liking of Trideshwar Dayals their protest is in form of a major point; the award is on a plain paper, unstamped and unregistered and is inadmissible too. The relief to summarily reject it ; rather not to make it a rule of the court. The Civil Judge frames an issue to still this controversy.
(2.) He decides but the cause moves from court to court; three times in Hon'ble High Court, twice in Hon'ble Supreme Court four times before Collector, Sitapur. It is in Board of Revenue for the fifth time; twice before me. Most of the opinions are reported in law journals as is documented in my judgement dated 24-5-1993,; 1993 RD 329. It is needless to re-summarise the fluctuating fortunes of this continuing contest; whether the end is at hand ? is uncertain.
(3.) The revision is against the order of Collector dated 12-10-1992. By this he has determined the stamp duty and penalty. The stamp duty at Rs. 3380.25 and 10 times penalty at Rs. 33862.50. The break up against each is as below: JUDGEMENT_92_LAWS(ALL)4_1994_1.html;