MOHAN Vs. DY. DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri K. Ajit, counsel for the petitioners and Standing Counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The writ petition has been filed against the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation (respondent-1) dated 03.08.2013, rejecting the application of the petitioners dated 02.05.2013, for summoning Gram Panchayat Adhikari, for proving the certified copy of Pariwar Register filed by respondent-4 and application dated 06.06.2013 for admitting additional evidence of the certified copies of Pariwar Register filed by the petitioners, in title proceedings, under U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(3.) The dispute relates to the land of basic consolidation year khatas 259, 674 and 1048, of village Dadiyal Ehatmali, tahsil Tanda, district Rampur, which were recorded in the name of Gyani son of Tika Ram (now represented by the petitioners). Bhagwan Das (respondent-4) filed an objection (registered as Case 48/2009-10) under Section 9-A of the Act, on 01.05.1997 claiming co-tenancy of 1/2 share in the land in dispute. It has been stated by respondent-4 that the land in dispute was his ancestral property from the time of common ancestor Tika Ram son Moti, who had two sons Kaluwa and Gyani. Kaluwa, father of respondent-4 died about 40 years ago during life time of his father Tika Ram, leaving behind him as his only heir. After death of Tika Ram, the name of Gyani alone was recorded, in the revenue record, as at that time he was minor. Gyani also died and was inherited by his five sons Bhola Ram, Mohan, Kashi Ram, Chandra Pal and Dharam Pal. The petitioners contested the objection of respondent-4 and stated that respondent-4 did not belong to his family. The real name of Bhagwan Das (respondent-4) was Bhagwati son of Natthu who was son of Kashi. In collusion with his brother Hira and Shyam Lal sons of Natthu, Bhagwati did not claim heirship of his father Natthu. Now he has filed this objection on false allegations, changing his name as Bhagwan Das son of Kaluwa. Tika Ram had only one son Gyani. Tika Ram died 40 years ago, since then name of Gyani alone was recorded over the land in dispute and respondent-4 never raised any objection in this respect although he had attained the age of majority long before. The objection was tried and decided by Consolidation Officer, Rampur, who by his order dated 20.12.2001 held that Kaluwa father of Bhagwan Das (respondent-4) was son of Tika Ram. Kaluwa was predeceased to his father Tika Ram as such after death of Tika Ram, Bhagwan Das inherited 1/2 share in the property in dispute. However in respect of some plots objection of Bhagwan Das was dismissed. The petitioners filed appeals (registered as Appeal Nos. 167/413 and 168/414) from the aforesaid order which were dismissed by Settlement Officer Consolidation by order dated 01.09.2002.