Back
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J.
Ganesh Dutt and Ors. - Appellant
Versus
Dy. Director of Consolidation/ADM (F&R) and Ors. - Respondent
Writ-B No. 63230 of 2014
Decided On : 12-01-2015
Will - Property Dispute - U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, Section 9-A - The judgment discusses the dispute over ancestral property and the alleged Will dated 5.7.1968 executed by Shyam Sunder in favor of Rameshwar Prasad. The court considered the genuineness of the Will, the date of death of Shyam Sunder, and the contradictory evidence presented by the parties.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves a property dispute over ancestral land in village Kui, tahsil Mau, district Chitrakoot. The dispute arises from the objection filed by Rameshwar Prasad under section 9-A of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, claiming his share in the land based on an alleged Will executed by Shyam Sunder in his favor.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the alleged Will dated 5.7.1968 was highly suspicious, especially considering that Rameshwar Prasad had previously filed suits based on adverse possession without disclosing the Will. The court also noted discrepancies in the evidence presented by the parties and upheld the findings of the consolidation authorities.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the genuineness of the alleged Will, the date of death of Shyam Sunder, and the contradictory evidence presented by the parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court upheld the findings of the consolidation authorities, considering the suspicious circumstances surrounding the alleged Will and the contradictory evidence presented by the parties.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, affirming the decisions of the consolidation authorities.
Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J.
1. Heard Sri Brajesh Shukla for the petitioners. Supplementary Affidavit, filed by the petitioners is taken on record. This writ petition has been filed against the orders of Consolidation Officer, dated 23.8.2002, dismissing objection of Rameshwar Prasad (now represented by the petitioners), Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 27.10.2005, and Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 4.9.2014, dismissing the appeal and revision of Rameshwar Prasad, in proceeding under section 9-Aof U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
2. The dispute between the parties is in respect of land of khata 136 of village Kui, tahsil Mau, district Chitrakoot. In basic consolidation record, names of the petitioners, respondents-4 to 7 and Rameshwar Prasad were recorded over the land in dispute. Rameshwar Prasad filed an objection (registered as Case No. 319/2001-2002) under section 9-A of the Act, for deleting the names of respondents 4 to 6 from the land in dispute and declaring his share as 1/2 in it. It has been stated that the land in dispute was ancestral property of the parties coming from the time of Duniapati, who had four sons namely Shyam Sunder, Ram Kanhai, Rameshwar Prasad and Ramanand. Apart from the land in dispute, the parties were also having ancestral properties in villages Chhibo, Piperiamafi, Sikari and Ramnagar. In family settlement, Shyam Sunder was given properties of village Ramnagar. Sons of Shyam Sunder were residing there and was not taking care of Shyam Sunder. Shyam Sunder was living along with his brother Rameshwar Prasad at village Chhibo, who was looking after him, in his old age, and had also incurred huge amount in the treatment of Shyam Sunder. Due to services rendered by Rameshwar Prasad, Shyam Sunder executed a Will dated 5.7.1968, by which he had given his share in the land of villages, Kui, Chhibo, Piperiamafi and Sikari to Rameshwar Prasad. Ambika Prasad and others (respondents-4 to 6) through their guardian Smt. Ramadevi contested the objection of Rameshwar Prasad and denied execution of any Will by Shyam Sunder in favour of Rameshwar Prasad. It has been stated by the respondents that Shyam Sunder had not executed any will in favour of Rameshwar Prasad. Shyam Sunder died on 17.10.1967 and after his death, names of respondents-4 to 6 were mutated over the land in dispute and other properties of Shyam Sunder. In the year 1991, Rameshwar Prasad mala fide filed suits under section 229-B of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951, claiming his right over the land in dispute on the basis of adverse possession, which was abated under section 5(2) of the Act. Now, in consolidation, they filed objection on the basis of Will dated 5.7.1968, which was a fabricated document and has been procured after death of Shyam Sunder.
3. The case was tried by Consolidation Officer. The petitioners, apart from documentary evidence, examined Smt. Raj Kishori (attesting witness), Ram Surat, Sunder Lal and Rameshwar Prasad as witnesses. The respondents, apart from documentary evidence examined, Smt. Deokali (attesting witness), Indra Narain, Awadhesh Prasad and Ambika Prasad, witnesses. The Consolidation Officer, after hearing the parties, by order dated 23.8.2002 held that Deokali, one of the attesting witness of the Will had denied her thumb impression on the Will, who was an educated lady and used to make signatures. From the extract of Pariwar Register, filed by the respondents, it was proved that on the date of the will dated 5.7.1968, Shyam Sunder was dead. Shyam Sunder was having three sons who were also having interest in the ancestral properties and could not be deprived from it. Although Shyam Sunder died in the year 1967 but Rameshwar Prasad did not make any effort for getting his name mutated over his properties, while the names of the respondents were mutated and no objection was raised by him. The Will was executed on a stamp paper of British period. The properties of
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
