JUDGMENT :

(Jaspreet Singh, J.)

1. Heard Shri Lakshmana Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Shri B. K. Saxena, learned counsel for the caveator respondent no.6.

2. Under challenge is the order dated 17.01.2022 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Ayodhya Division whereby in proceedings arising out of Section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act 1901, the order dated 04.02.2019 has been affirmed by which the mutation order has been passed in favour of respondent no.6.

3. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the property in question was recorded in the name of Bhanu Pratap Singh.

4. Bhanu Pratap Singh had initially executed a registered Will in favour of Smt. Shanti Devi, wife of Jabar Bahadur Singh, the mother of the petitioners. Subsequently, the said Will was revoked and another registered Will was executed by Bhanu Pratap Singh in favour of the present petitioners. Subsequently, by means of another Will dated 30.11.2012 the earlier two Wills were revoked and a fresh Will came to be executed in favour of the private respondent no.6, who is the son-in-law of Bhanu Pratap Singh.

5. After the death of