Point of Law:
A transfer of a particular Khata of the joint family property of the Zamindar made through a registered Patta Istamrari in favour of a minor son of the Zamindar, through the agency of his guardian, is a transfer of title of that part of the joint family property to the individual member

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri A.N. Bhargava, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Triveni Shankar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos.2/1 to 2/8.

2. This writ petition is directed against an order dated 30.03.1987 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Varanasi in Revision no.251/228/9225, arising from proceedings under Section 9-A (2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (for short, the Act). The Deputy Director of Consolidation, Varanasi by his judgment and order aforesaid has reversed the two Authorities below and allowed the objections brought by respondent no.2, Mathura, now represented by his heirs and legal representatives.

3. The dispute between parties concerns title to Khata no.287 of Village Jathi, Pargana Kol Asla, Tehsil and District Varanasi. While the petitioner, Dwarka claims exclusive title to the said Khata, the second respondent, Mathura asserts a half share therein. It may be indicated here that the original parties to the lis, both Dwarka and Mathura, sons of Har Nandan are dead; they are represented before this Court, now by their heirs and legal representatives, petitioners nos.1 to 1/6 and respondent nos.2/1 to 2/8, respectively. It is not in issue between parties that Dwarka and Mathura were brothers. For felicity of understanding about the rights of parties, their relationship is shown by the following pedigree:

4. It appears that Hari Nandan was a Zamindar who had two wives, Dulra and Bechni. Dwarka and Mathura are sons born to Hari Nandan of his wife, Dulra, whereas Shiv Murat is a son born of his other wife, Bechni. It is not in issue between parties that Khata no.287 was transferred to Dwarka and Bechni by Hari Nandan through a registered Patta Istamrari, dated 24.04.1923. It is also not in issue that on the basis of the aforesaid Patta, Dwarka and Smt. Bechni came to be recorded in the Khatauni for the Fasli Year 1334 (equivalent to the Calendar Year 1926) with a remark that the rights are three years old. The aforesaid Patta in original and a certified copy of the Khatauni of the year 1934 Fasli were filed by Dwarka. It is also not in issue between parties that Dwarka remained recorded from 1926 right upto the year 1974 when these consolidation operations commenced, to the exclusion of Mathura, his brother. Bechni, of course, was recorded along with him but there is no issue about her rights, or for that matter, her son and Dwarka's consanguine brother, Shiv Murat.

5. Dwarka's case is that Khata no.287 (hereinafter referred to as the property in dispute) after execution of the Patta dated 24.04.1923 in his favour, no longer remained property of his father, Hari Nandan or a joint family property of the Zamindar, but turned his exclusive property. Since he remained recorded throughout from the year 1926 on that basis, right across Fasli 1359, when the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 came into force without objection from Mathura, upto the year 1974 when consolidation operations were notified, and these objections were filed, Mathura has no right to question his exclusive title to the land in dispute. The claim to a half share in the land in dispute by Mathura is without basis. The Consolidation Officer by his judgment and order dated 31.12.1974 rejected Mathura's objections. Mathura carried an Appeal to the Assistant Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Varanasi East, under Section 11 of the Act, who dismissed it by his judgment and order dated 12.05.1978, affirming the Consolidation Officer. On a further challenge laid by Mathura to both these orders before the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Varanasi, under Section 48 of the Act, the Deputy Director