Mr. Augustine George Masih, J. (Oral):- Petitioners have approached this Court challenging the order dated 16.11.2018 (Annexure P-11) passed by the Financial Commissioner, Revenue, Haryana, order dated 19.07.2016 (Annexure P-10) passed by the Commissioner, Gurgaon Division, Gurgaon, and the order dated 25.07.2014 (Annexure P-9) passed by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Hodal, District Palwal, whereby the objections filed by the petitioners were dismissed and the sanad taksim of the same date was issued, which order has been upheld upto the Financial Commissioner.

2. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners although initially did not file any objection when naksha ‘A’ was prepared but at the stage of issuance of naksha ‘B’, objections were filed which were not accepted by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade. He contends that three objections were filed by the petitioners. The first objection was that the share of the petitioners has been wrongly determined in the partition application and in naksha ‘B’. The second objection was with regard to the fact that there was a title dispute between the parties before the Civil Court because of