Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J.

1. The writ petition impugns:-

(i) Order dated 3rd April, 1981 of the Revenue Assistant, Delhi dismissing the application under Section 11(1)(a) of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 of the deceased petitioner No. 1 Sh. Dedh Raj @ Desh Raj. (during the pendency of the said application, the petitioner No. 2 herein Sh. Ram Niwas was allowed to be impleaded as applicant No. 2.).

(ii) The order dated 20th September, 1983 of the Additional Collector, Delhi dismissing the first appeal under Section 185 of the Reforms Act of Sh. Dedh Raj and Sh. Ram Niwas against the order aforesaid of the Revenue Assistant.

(iii) Order dated 22nd November, 1984 of the Financial Commissioner dismissing the second appeal of Sh. Dedh Raj and Sh. Ram Niwas against the order aforesaid of the Additional Collector, Delhi.

2. The petitioners also seek the relief of declaration that they are the exclusive Bhumidhars of the land subject matter of the writ petition and to the exclusion of the respondent No. 4 Smt. Misri Devi. Alternative relief of declaration that Smt. Misri Devi has only 1/3rd share in the said land instead of 1/2 as recorded in her name in the revenue records and that Sh. Dedh Raj and Sh. Ram Niwas have 2/3rd share therein, is also claimed.

3. Even though this writ petition was preferred after nearly two years of the order of the Financial Commissioner, vide ex parte order dated 28th May, 1986 Rule was issued and respondent No. 4 Smt. Misri Devi restrained from transferring 1/6th of her undivided share in the land subject matter of the writ petition. The said interim order was confirmed on 18th September, 1986 after hearing the counsel for the respondent No. 4 Smt. Misri Devi.

4. The factual matrix as now emerging from the records is as under:-

(i) Sh. Dedh Raj filed the application aforesaid under Section 11 of the Reforms Act pleading:-

(a) that land admeasuring 288 Bighas and 1 Biswas situated in the revenue estate of Village-Matiala, Najafgarh, Delhi belonged to his father Sh. Ram Saran;

(b) that on the demise of Sh. Ram Saran, the said land was inherited by the three sons of Sh. Ram Saran namely Sh. Dedh Raj, Sh. Sahaj Ram and Sh. Rati Ram;

(c) that upon the demise of Sh. Rati Ram in the year 1940 his 1/3rd share in the said land devolved on his widow i.e. respondent No. 4 herein Smt. Misri Devi;

(d) that thereafter Sh. Sahaj Ram died without leaving any widow or children and under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, his 1/3rd share in the said land devolved on his brother Sh. Dedh Raj;

(e) however Smt. Misri Devi filed a suit for partition against Sh. Dedh Raj claiming 1/2 share in the said land on the basis of the entries in the Record of Rights/Annual Register and which suit was pending disposal;

(f) that on account of some misunderstanding, the Bhumidhari and Proprietary Rights in the revenue records were shown to the extent of 1/2 share in the entire holding in the name of Smt. Misri Devi, though he (Sh. Dedh Raj) was in cultivatory possession of the whole land and was in dark about the error in the revenue record and which came to his notice only on the suit for partition being filed by Smt. Misri Devi;

(g) it was the plea of Sh. Dedh Raj that Smt. Misri Devi was entitled to only 1/3rd share in the entire land and he had Bhumidhari rights over 2/3rd share of the said land;

(h) accordingly, declaration was sought that Sh. Dedh Raj was the Bhumidhar of 2/3rd share in the land aforesaid.

(ii) Smt. Misri Devi contested the said application by filing a reply pleading that the same was barred by time inasmuch as Sh. Sahaj Ram died much prior to the commencement of the Reforms Act, and on his death his share in the land was mutated in the names of Sh. Dedh Raj and Smt. Misri Devi in equal share and Sh. Dedh Raj had never challenged the said mutation sanctioned by the Revenue Authorities and was estopped from challenging the same by way of application under Section 11 of the Reforms Act; that Sh. Dedh Raj and Smt. Misri Devi had sold part