NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH, J.

1. By this writ petition, petitioner has challenged Annexure-3 and Annexure-4 being the appellate order under Section-35, passed by the Consolidation Authority whereby the three orders passed in three different cases by the Consolidation Officer under Section-10(6) of the Bihar Consolidations of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) have been set aside in a singular appeal and revision. The petitioner, being the son of Satram Dubey, the younger brother of Bhagwan Dubey, had received in gift entire right, title and interest of Bhagwan Dubey in the properties inherited by him from his father Guput Dubey. This gift deed was duly registered and was executed after due permission was granted by the Consolidation Authority under Section-5 of the Act. The contesting parties to this writ petition are the two elder brothers of the petitioner namely Krishna Dubey and Baliram Dubey, three cousins being son of Kawal Dubey, who was the youngest brother of Bhagwan Dubey and Satram Dubey, and Satram Dubey and the three are Rajbanshi Dubey @ Jagdish Dubey, Rameshwar Dubey and Rambali Dubey. When the consolidation proceeding started, petitioner filed two applications before the Consolidation Authority, giving rise to two cases being Case Nos.54 of 1984 and 55 of 1985. The first was that the lands that the petitioner had received as gift from his uncle Bhagwan Dubey should be separately carved out. The second was that lands which the petitioner had received on partition be also separately carved out. A third application being Case No. 70 of 1984-85 was filed by Bhagwan Dubey praying that he had self acquired landed property of about 10 acres which should be separately carved out. All these three separate applications were contested by Kawal Dubey i.e. the youngest brother of Bhagwan Dubey and the uncle of the petitioner and others. After hearing the parties, by order dated 27.3.1985, the Consolidation Officer allowed all the three applications holding that a partition had taken place as between the four brothers being sons of Guput Dubey in the year 1966 and they were coming in possession of their respective shares, though there was no written document in support thereof. Consequently, he held that the gift made by Bhagwan Dubey to the petitioner Ram Bharat Dubey by registered deed after due permission was valid and separate ‘Chak’ could be carved out in respect thereof. He then held that as a consequence of partition between the four brothers of the petitioner being the son of Satram Dubey separate ‘Chak’ had to be carved out, so far as petitioner is concerned, and similarly there already having been partition in the family of Bhagwan Dubey, his self acquired separate property be carved out as a separate ‘Chak’. Thus, all these three applications were allowed, though by a common order which is Annexure-2. Against the orders passed on these three applications, Kawal Dubey, the youngest brother of Bhagwan Dubey and uncle of petitioner, filed a singular appeal under Section-10(6) of the Act being Appeal No. 77 of 1985-86. That was allowed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Rohtas in Appeal No. 77 of 1985-86 by order dated 19.9.1988, which is Annexure-3, acting as delegate of Director, Consolidation, and petitioner’s revision was dismissed. Hence, this writ petition.

2. Heard Shri Shashi Shekhar Dwivedi, learned Senior Counsel for the writ petitioner and Shri Choubey Jawahar, learned counel for the contesting respondents.

3. On behalf of the contesting respondents, it is first urged that the gift deed, though executed with permission of the Consolidation Authority and is a registered document, as executed by Bhagwan Dubey in favour of the petitioner Ram Bharat Dubey, is void and unenforceable because it transfers the right, title and interest without there being a partition. In other words, it gifts effectively undivided share in immovable properties. The