Janardan Sahai, J. - (1.) The dispute relates to the share of the Raghunandan Singh in plots of one which was co-tenancy Khata while the other two Khatas were his sole tenancy. Objections under section 9 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act were filed by the respondents Natthu Singh and others claiming inheritance of the share of Raghunandan Singh. The petitioners on the other hand filed objections under section 12 of the Act on the basis of a registered gift deed dated 31.1.1968 said to have been executed by Raghunandan Singh in their favour. Another objection was filed by respondents Sriram Singh and Sant Ram Singh on the basis of an agreement of sale dated 13.11.1967 said to have been executed by Raghunandan Singh before the gift deed. The gift deed relied upon by the petitioners was disputed by Natthu Singh and others. The* Consolidation Officer by his order dated 16.3.1983 found that the gift deed was not proved and he therefore, dismissed the objections of the petitioners. He also dismissed the objections of Sriram Singh and Sant Ram Singh who had claimed rights on the basis of the agreement of sale and allowed the objections of Natthu Singh and others. Against the order of the Consolidation Officer an appeal was preferred by the petitioners which was dismissed by the Assistant Settlement Officer Consolidation by order dated 17.9.1984 and the revision filed by the petitioners was dismissed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation by order dated 4.3.1987. All the three orders have been challenged by the petitioners.
(2.) I have heard Sri R.C. Singh learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri V.K.S. Chaudhary learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri R.S. Maurya for the respondents.
(3.) Before the Consolidation Officer oral and documentary evidence was adduced by the parties. The gift deed was sought to be proved by attesting witness Ram Prakash Singh. The Consolidation Officer found that there were certain suspicious circumstances surrounding the execution of the gift deed and therefore did not find it reliable. He found that the stamp paper on which the document was executed was purchased at Kanpur which was not a natural place for purchase as the deed was registered in Orai and Raghunandan Singh was also a resident of Bohadpura a village in Tehsil Orai. He also found that the gift deed was executed at the house of one Sunder Lal Tiwari who is a resident of Village Tulsipur even though the Sub-Registrar's Office falls in between Village Bohadpura where Raghunandan Singh lived and the house of Sunder Lal Tiwari. Even so the gift deed was not registered in the Office of the Sub Registrar but at the house of Sunder Lal Tiwari where the Registrar was called on commission. Certain contradictions between the statement of petitioner Ram Swaroop Singh and the attesting witness Ram Prakash Singh were also found by the Consolidation Officer.;