SATYENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel as well as learned counsel for opposite party no.2.
(2.) SINCE the common order has been challenged in both the petitions, therefore, they have been clubbed together and are being decided by a common judgement.
(3.) BOTH the petitions have been filed challenging the order dated 3.12.2014 passed by the Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow in Revisions No.2300 L.R. 2011 -12 and 799 L.R. 2012 -13 by means of which both the revisions filed by opposite party no.2 have been allowed. The facts in brief are that the dispute is regarding the property of Smt. Ganga Kunwari widow of Ganga Ram. Smt. Ganga Kunwari had no issue and she executed a registered will deed on 23.9.1985 in favour of Smt. Sukh Devi, who applied for mutation and the mutation application was allowed vide order dated 20.4.2009. Smt. Sukh Devi executed a registered sale deed in favour of petitioner no.2 and the other petitioners of Writ Petition No.281 (MS) of 2015 on 8.11.2012. Thereafter, they applied for mutation and their mutation application was allowed vide order dated 22.12.2012. Feeling aggrieved with the mutation order, Mohan Singh and others filed Appeal No.07/08 -09 against Sukh Devi under Section 210 of the Land Revenue Act, which is still pending. Opposite parties/Mohan Singh and others preferred Regular Suit No.140 of 2013 for cancellation of sale deed Executed by Smt. Sukh Devi, which is also pending.;