JUDGMENT :

Jahangir Jamshed Munir, J.

1. This writ petition arises out of objections filed under Section 9-A (2) of the U.P Consolidation of Holdings Act filed by the petitioner No. 1, Smt. Amarwati. The objections were filed on 2.4.1991, claiming succession on basis of the last Will and testament of one, Roshan Singh, the last undisputed recorded tenure holder and the father-in-law of the petitioner No. 1, Smt. Amarwati. The right that was claimed under the Will relates to Khata Nos. 172, 407, amongst others-situate in village Rabada, Pargana Shikarpur, Tehsil and District Bulandshahar.

2. It would be profitable to refer to the short pedigree of parties in order to appreciate the petitioner's claim, and, that of the contesting respondent Nos. 4 and 5. The pedigree aforesaid is depicted below:

3. The petitioner's case as put forward in the objections is that the original tenure holder, Roshan Singh had three sons, namely, Kanchhi, Shishpal and Sahaspal. Sahaspal admittedly predeceased, Roshan Singh. The first petitioner is the widow of Sahaspal. The petitioner acknowledges that in the basic year relative to the consolidation operations to which the objections relate, Roshan Singh was recorded as the bhumidhar in possession of Khata Nos. 172, 405, 407, 82A and 82B. In the basic year aforesaid over the Khata No. 172, the name of Devi Singh and Roshan Singh, sons of Udal Singh were recorded as co-tenure holders whereas, over Khata No. 405, Roshan Singh S/o Udal Singh was exclusively recorded. Likewise, in Khata No. 407, Roshan Singh and Devi Singh, last mentioned alongwith Kanchhi Singh S/o Ram Singh, were recorded. In Khata No. 82A Khadak Singh, Chandrapal, Man Singh, Shankar, Mahesh, sons of Chhitar Singh, Devi Singh and Roshan Singh S/o Udal Singh, Ramji Lal, Gyan Singh, Rewati S/o Chhattar Singh were recorded. In Khata No. 82 B, Khadak Singh, Chandrapal, Man Singh, Shankar, Mahesh S/o Chhitar Singh, Devi Singh and Roshan sons of Udal Singh, Gyan Singh, Rewati sons of Chattar Singh, Kundi Singh S/o Ram Singh were recorded. This is how the original tenure holder, Roshan Singh's tenure was recorded over different khatas in the basic year last mentioned.

4. The objections that were filed under Section 9 A(2) by the petitioner No. 1, Amarwati before the Consolidation Officer have been perused in original. It figures at the top of the memorandum of the objection dated 2.4.1991 that it relates to Khata No. 407. It is claimed in the objections that Roshan Singh had executed a Will and testament dated 5.6.1987 that is his last Will, giving rights to the petitioner, Amarwati in terms of the said Will over khatas mentioned there. She claimed a right to be recorded annexing a copy of the Will aforesaid as the basis of her objections. The claim of Smt. Amarwati was contested by the two surviving sons of the testator, Roshan Singh, that is to say, Kanchhi Singh and Shishpal, respondent Nos. 4 and 5 here, who did not dispute the Will but contested the Amarwati's claim with a case that she had under the Will of Roshan Singh a right to maintenance during her life time, charged upon a specified share in the khata in dispute. To that share too she had a right to the usufruct to satisfy her right to maintenance. Upon her death rights to the said share in land would revert to respondent Nos. 4 and 5, free of the widow's charge. She entered into a matrimony of sorts described in local and customary usage as karab. It was, therefore, pleaded that by her aforesaid act of entering into matrimony, she lost her limited right of maintenance to the revisionary heirs, going by the nature and purpose of that right. On the basis of aforesaid pleadings, the Consolidation Officer framed the following four issues (rendered into english from hindi vernacular):

(I) Wheth