Ashok Bhushan, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri G.N. Verma, learned senior Advocate and Sri Satya Prakash appearing for the respondents.
(2.) BY this writ petition the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 6^th March, 1984 passed by the 3^rd Additional District Judge allowing the revision filed by the respondent No. 2 against the judgment and order dated 14.11.1979 passed by the Munsif, Fatehabad in Original Suit No. 273 of 1973. The original suit No. 273 of 1973 was filed by the petitioners impleading the respondent No. 2 as the defendant No. 3 and other defendants praying for a decree of declaration that the sale deed dated 3.3.1966 executed by Smt. Chadrawali in favour of the defendant No. 3 Bishan Lal is null and void. Before the trial court issue No. 4 was framed to the effect that "whether the suit is barred by Section 49 of the Consolidation of Holdings Act -. Learned Munsif decided the issue in favour of the plaintiffs and held that the suit is not barred. A revision was filed by the respondent No. 3 Bishan Lal which has been allowed by the revisions court. The revisional court has held that the suit is barred under Section 49 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act. The order of the revisional court dated 6^th March, 1984 has been challenged in this writ petition. Brief facts necessary for appreciating the controversy raised in the writ petition are that the land in question was taken under consolidation proceedings under the provisions of the UP. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953. The village was published under Section 9 of the UP. Consolidation of Holdings Act on 25.2.1964 and a time barred objection was filed by Smt. Surya Kumari on 13.5.1966 claiming that the name of Smt. Chandrawali is wrongly recorded. It was further stated that Smt. Chandrawali was not entitled to execute any sale deed. The land in dispute was recorded originally in the name of one Agent Singh. Smt. Savitri Devi was his widow and Smt. Chandrawali was the widowed mother Both Smt. Savitri Devi and Smt. Chandrawali executed the sale deed. Smt. Surya Kumari was vendee from Smt. Savitri Devi and an objection under Section 9 of the UP. Consolidation of Holdings Act was taken by Smt. Savitri Devi against Smt. Chandrawali. The case was that Smt. Chandrawali did not inherit after the death of Agent Singh and her name has been wrongly recorded and the sale deed executed by her was without any right. The objection of Smt. Surya Kumari was rejected and an objection under Section 11(1) of the UP. Consolidation of Holdings Act was filed by Smt. Surya Kumari which was dismissed by the Settlement Officer of Consolidation on 8.5.1967. A revision was filed before the Deputy Director of Consolidation which revision was also dismissed. A writ petition No. 2291 of 1969 was filed by Smt. Surya Kumari which writ petition was also dismissed by the order of this Court dated 15.12.1972. After dismissal of the above writ petition suit No. 273 of 1973 was filed by the petitioners seeking declaration that the sale deed dated 3.3.1966 is null and void.
(3.) SRI G.N. Verma, learned senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner raised following two submissions : - (i) the sale deed in question was a voidable sale deed and it was only the civil court who had jurisdiction to decide the issue and the suit was not barred under Section 49 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act. (ii) Consolidation courts had not decided any issue after taking the evidence no findings have been rendered by the consolidation courts that the sale deed is void. The issue having not been decided by the consolidation courts, the civil court had jurisdiction to entertain the suit and decide the matter.;