SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(Pat) 572

PATNA HIGH COURT
R.M.Prasad, J.
Bhubneshwar Rai
Versus
State Of Bihar
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8 of 1985 ;
Decided On : SEPTEMBER 6, 1996

The objection filed by Respondent No. 5 under Sec. 12-A (2) of the Act was barred by time and also on the ground that on an earlier occasion, Respondent No. 5's objection was already dismissed, as per the provisions of Sec. 10-A of the Act.

Headnote:

CONSOLIDATION OF HOLDINGS - OBJECTION TO DRAFT CONSOLIDATION SCHEME - BAR TO OBJECTION - REVISION - SCOPE AND POWER OF DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION - BIHAR CONSOLIDATION OF HOLDINGS AND PREVENTION OF FRAGMENTATION ACT, 1956 (BIHAR ACT 12 OF 1956), SECS. 10, 10-A, 12, 35.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioners and Respondent No. 5 were members of a joint Hindu family. Respondent No. 5 was the Karta of the family until 1968 when the family lands were divided for agricultural purposes. In 1951, one Surya Bansh Singh gifted 5.31 acres of land to Respondent No. 5, who blended the gifted lands with the ancestral lands of the family. During the last revisional survey, Khata No. 109 was carved out of old Khata No. 191 and recorded in the name of Respondent No. 5 and Sant Bilash Rai, father of the petitioners. Respondent No. 5 filed an objection under Sec. 12-A (2) of the Act, which was rejected by the Consolidation Officer. Respondent No. 5 filed an appeal, which was allowed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation. The Director of Consolidation, in revision, set aside the order of the Deputy Director and upheld the order of the Consolidation Officer.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the objection filed by Respondent No. 5 under Sec. 12-A (2) of the Act was barred by time and also on the ground that on an earlier occasion, Respondent No. 5's objection was already dismissed. The court further held that the Director of Consolidation had no power to entertain the objection of Respondent No. 5 in the revision filed before him, which was barred under Sec. 10-A. The court also held that the impugned orders passed by the Director and the Consolidation Officer purporting to be under Sec. 35 and Section 12-A (2) of the Act were bad in law and were fit to be set aside.

Issues: 1. Whether the objection filed by Respondent No. 5 under Sec. 12-A (2) of the Act was barred by time and also on the ground that on an earlier occasion, Respondent No. 5's objection was already dismissed? 2. Whether the Director of Consolidation had the power to entertain the objection of Respondent No. 5 in the revision filed before him, which was barred under Sec. 10-A? 3. Whether the impugned orders passed by the Director and the Consolidation Officer purporting to be under Sec. 35 and Section 12-A (2) of the Act were bad in law and were fit to be set aside?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the objection filed by Respondent No. 5 under Sec. 12-A (2) of the Act was barred by time and also on the ground that on an earlier occasion, Respondent No. 5's objection was already dismissed, as per the provisions of Sec. 10-A of the Act. 2. The court held that the Director of Consolidation had no power to entertain the objection of Respondent No. 5 in the revision filed before him, which was barred under Sec. 10-A. 3. The court held that the impugned orders passed by the Director and the Consolidation Officer purporting to be under Sec. 35 and Section 12-A (2) of the Act were bad in law and were fit to be set aside, as the objection was barred under Sec. 10-A.

Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and quashed the impugned orders passed by the Director and the Consolidation Officer.

Judgment

Radha Mohan Prasad, J.

1. In this writ application the prayer of the petitioners is to quash the order of the director of Consolidation, Bihar, Patna (Respondent No.2) dated 30-10-1984 in revision case No.966 of 1978 setting aside the order dated 30-8-78, passed by the Deputy Director, Consolidation (Respondent No.3) in Consolidation appeal No.61/77-78 and thereby affirming the order dated 14-11-77 passed by the Consolidation Officer, udwantnagar in the District of Bhojpur (Respondent No 4) in Consolidation case No.276/1945-76-77 purporting to be under Sec.12-A (2) of the Bihar consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ).

2. In short, the case of the petitioners is that they and respondent no.5 are stated to be members of the joint Hindu family. Respondent No.5 was Karta of the family consisting of petitioners also till 1968, when the lands of the family were divided for the purpose of agriculture. On 9-5-51 one surya Bansh Singh, a pattidar of the petitioners and respondent No.5 executed a registered deed of gift with respect to 5.31 acre of land comprising of several plots of old Khata No.191. It is stated that respondent No.5 being the Karta of the family blended the gifted lands with the ancestral lands of the family and the petitioners as well as respondent No.5 came into joint possession and continued as such. During the last revisional survey Khata No.109 was carved out of old khata No.191 and it was recorded in the name of respondent No.5 and Sant Bilash Rai, father of the petitioners. Although fathers name of the petitioners was Sant Bilash rai, by mistake in the Khatian Basant and Bilas were written in place of Sant bilash Rai. The Khatian was finally published in the year 1970, in which the lands in question were recorded jointly in the name of respondent No.5 and sant Bilas Rai, despite objection filed by respondent No.5 under Sec.103-A of the Bihar Tenancy Act (hereinafter referred to as the B. T Act ). Respondent No.5 filed petition under Section 108 of the B. T. Act and on the said petition suit No.28/72 was started in the court of Asst. Settlement Officer, arrah. However, during the pendency of the suit a consolidation proceeding was started and the said suit abated.

3. In the consolidation proceedings the lands were recorded in the joint names of Sant Bilas Rai and respondent no.5 and registers of land and statement of principles were published under section 9-A of the Act. Admittedly, no objection under Sec.10 (2) of the act was filed by respondent No.5 and accordingly Chak No.69 was recorded in the joint name of Sant Bilash Singh and Nathuni Rai (respondent No.5 ). It appears that respondent No.5 filed an objection under Sec.12-A (2) of the act, upon which case No.192/75 was started and the Consolidation Officer rejected the said objection in exercise of the power under Sec.12-A (1 ). In the said case the petitioners claimed to have filed an application for substitution of their names after the death of sant Bilas Singh, which was allowed vide order dated 12-11-75 in respect of khata no.69/109. A true copy of the said order has been annexed as annexure-7.

4. On 26-2-75 respondent No.5 filed an objection purporting to be under Sec.12-A (1) of the Act before the Consolidation Officer, Udwantnagar praying therein that the name of Sant Bilas Singh be deleted from Chak No.69 and also praying for making certain changes in the recording of some plots in the name of Sant Bilas singh. The Consolidation Officer, by his order dated 15-1-77 (annexure-4)rejected the said objection of respondent No.5 being barred by time and also on the ground that on earlier occasion objection of respondent No.5 was already dismissed. Respondent No.5 filed appeal No.276/47 of 76-77 under Sec.37-A of the Act against the aforesaid order dated 15-1-77, in which the Deputy Director, Consolidation, bhojpur remanded the case to Consolidation Officer, udwant Nagar on 29-8-77.









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top