- (1.) HEARD Sri R.P.S. Chauhan learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
(2.) THE petition arises out of proceedings under Section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act and is directed against the orders passed by the Nayab Tehsildar, the Sub Divisional Officer and the Additional Commissioner dated 14.02.2005, 04.05.2005 and 15.10.2012 respectively.
(3.) THE dispute in the petition pertains to land belonging to one Chandrapal son of Mahipal. The petitioner is the daughter of Chandrapal while the respondent no. 5 is his widow. It is the case of the petitioner that Chandrapal had executed a will in favour of the petitioner and respondent no. 5. However, upon his death the respondent no. 5 alone was mutated over the land in question by means of P.A. 11 Entry. The petitioner instituted proceedings under Section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, aggrieved by the P.A. 11 entry in favour of the respondent no. 5. Yet, another objection was raised by respondent no. 6, Rakesh Kumar, claiming on the basis of an adoption deed and a will in his favour.;