Revenue entries must reflect the title recognized by a valid consent decree, and cannot be revoked based on an unsustained challenge from a cooperative society.

JUDGMENT :

Nirzar S. Desai, J.

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Trivedi appearing for the petitioner, leaned advocate Mr. Abhimanyu Rathod appearing for the respondent no. 1 and learned AGP Mr. Jay Trivedi appearing for the respondents no. 3 to 7.

2. The respondent no. 2 happens to be the real brother of the petitioner as submitted by learned advocate Mr. Trivedi who has already relinquished his right by way of a partition in favour of the present petitioner and therefore, he is only a formal party.

3. With the consent of learned advocates appearing for the parties, the matter was taken up for final hearing. Hence, RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent – State.

4. By way of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 30.03.2016 by the respondent no. 6 i.e. Special Secretary, Revenue Department (Appeals) whereby he allowed the Revision Application No. RTS/ST/155 of 2012 and while allowing the revision application preferred by the respondent no. 1 quashed and set aside the order passed by the Collector, Surat dated 07.06.2012 passed in CTS/Revision Application No. 62 of 2011 and the learned Secretary further observed that decision of Civil Court shall be binding to both the parties.

5. The facts giving rise to the present petitioner can be summarized as under:-

5.1. The present petitioner is the owners / occupant who is in possession of the Bungalow No. 17/B situated upon the land bearing City Survey No. 1044/B, Ward: Athva, City: Surat situated in the land bearing Original Revenue Survey No. 27, 28/1, 28/2, 38, 41 and 42 paiki and 43 of Village : Athva, Taluka: City and District : Surat known as Adarsh Cooperative Housing Society Limited. The respondent no. 2 is owner who is in possession of Bungalow No. 17/A situated upon the land bearing City Survey No. 1044/A in the same land. The original land bearing Sub Plot No. 17 was purchased by the family fund of the petitioner herein and the respondent no. 2, who are real brothers and as the petitioner was living in U. K., the respondent no. 2 was shown as the owner of the bungalow and he was the member of Adarsh Cooperative Housing Society Limited.

5.2. In view of the fact that the petitioner was residing abroad at the time when the sale deed was executed. The sale deed was executed in favour of Kusumben Jashwantray Desai and Jashwantray Balwantray Desai after obtaining necessary permission from the Adarsh Cooperative Housing Society and share certificate were issued in favour of Kusumben Jashwantray Desai as the member of the Adarsh Society and the brother of the petitioner - respondent no. 2 herein Jasvantbhai was shown as nominee of Kusumben.

5.3. Upon the petitioner returned to India and upon the petitioner expressing his desire to partition the land owned jointly by the family, the partition of Sub Plot No. 17 was done. Pursuant to the petitioner having filed the Regular Suit No. 3189 of 1994 wherein on the basis of a consent / compromise arrived at between the petitioner and respondent no. 2 vide order passed below Exh. 12 in Regular Suit No. 3181 of 1994, the partition was done and a decree to that effect was drawn on 09.02.1995.

5.4. On the basis of the aforesaid consent decree, the names of the present petitioner and respondent no. 2 came to be entered in the Rule card / Property card in the record of City Survey Office whereby two City Survey No. 1044/A admeasuring 201.31.39 sq. mtrs and City Survey No. 1044 / B admeasuring 204.64.48 sq. mtrs. came under holding of the petitioner.

5.5. The petitioner on 20.