Back
PATNA HIGH COURT
Hari Lal Agrawal and Yadunath Sharan Singh JJ.
Dipnarain Chaudhary
Versus
State Of Bihar
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1523 of 1979 ;
Decided On : NOVEMBER 20, 1984
Mutation Proceeding - Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 - The court held that the mutation proceeding would abate due to the provision contained in Sec. 4(c) of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956, leading to the disposal of the petition.
Fact of the Case:
The writ application arose from a mutation proceeding for correction of records of rights initiated by the petitioners. The petitioners initially succeeded before the survey authority, but lost at higher authorities. The consolidation proceeding was started during the pendency of the mutation proceeding.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the mutation proceeding would abate under the provision of Sec. 4(c) of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956, and accordingly disposed of the petition.
Issues: The main issue was the abatement of the mutation proceeding due to the provision in the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of Sec. 4(c) of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956, which led to the abatement of the mutation proceeding.
Final Decision: The petition was accordingly disposed of in favor of the respondent No. 6.
H.L.Agrawal, J.
1. This writ application arises out of a mutation proceeding for correction of the records of rights initiated at the instance of the petitioners by mutating name of respondent No. 6 over a piece of land bearing plot No. 910 under khata No. 62 and plot No. 912 under khata No. 72, situated in village Bishunpur Kothai, P.S. Amarpur within the district of Bhagalpur.
2. The petitioners succeeded before the survey authority, who, by his order dated 28.3.1979 Annexure 9, decided the matter in favour of the petitioners, but on a matter taken to the higher authorities, the petitioners had lost at all stages vide orders dated 4.6.1974, 8.7.1977 and 24.4. 1979, contained in Annexures 10, 11 and 12, passed by the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Banka; the Additional Collector, Bhagalpur, and the learned Commissioner, Bhagalpur Division, Bhagalpur respondents No. 4, 3 and 2 respectively.
3. Undisputedly, during the pendency of this mutation proceeding, the Consolidation proceeding was started by the Government Notification dated 5.2.1973, Annexure 13.
4. One of the points taken by the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that by virtue of the provision contained in Sec. 4(c) of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956, the mutation proceeding would abate. The position is not disputed by respondent No. 6 in his counter-affidavit, rather, in paragraph 18, it has been contended that if the effect of the above provision would abate the consolidation proceeding then all orders passed against as well as in favour of the petitioners would abate. The stand of the respondent No. 6 in this regard appears to be correct in law, and accordingly it is held that the mutation proceeding will be deemed to have abated under the provision of the above jaw. All the orders passed in this respect contained in Annexure 9 to 12 will be accordingly deemed to be honest.
5. The petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
