IMPORTANT POINT
Misuse of legal process, failure to prove adverse possession, unauthorized property transfer.

JUDGMENT :

In Re: Civil Misc. Impleadment Application No.3 of 2019

1. Heard Mr. Himanshu Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. C.S. Agnihotri, learned counsel for respondent no.4/1.

2. The instant application has been filed on behalf of the applicant-Rajendra Kumar Rai to implead him as petitioner no.2 in the instant petition on the ground that the applicant-Rajendra Kumar Rai has purchased the plot in question by way of registered sale deed executed on 22.1.2001.

3. On the other hand, Mr. C.S. Agnihotri, learned counsel for respondent no.4/1 submitted that the applicant-Rajendra Kumar Rai has committed forgery and he is not bona fide purchaser, as such, he cannot be permitted to be impleaded in the instant petition. He further submitted that the petitioner no.1 has already sold the land in favour of several persons, as such, the applicant is not entitled to be impleaded in the instant petition.

4. I have considered the argument advanced by learned counsel for the parties.

5. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the fact that the writ petition against the order of the consolidation officer dated 26.3.1981 and Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 26.4.1989 is pending before this Court since 1990, as such, in order to decide the dispute finally between the parties, the applicant-Rajendra Kumar Rai is permitted to be impleaded in the instant petition as petitioner no.2.

6. The impleadment application is accordingly, allowed.

7. Office is directed to implead the applicant-Rajendra Kumar Rai as petitioner no.2 in the array of the parties to the writ petition.

Order on Writ Petition

1. Heard Mr. Himanshu Pandey, Mr. Awadhesh Prasad Pandey & Mr. J.P. Rai, learned counsel for petitioner no.2, Mr. C.S. Agnihotri, learned counsel for respondent no.4/1 and Mr. Rajesh Kumar Tiwari, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

2. Brief facts of the case are that dispute relates to Khata no.569, plot no.2083 area 0.30 acres and plot no.2086/1 area 0.70 acres situated at Mauza Mau, Pargana and Tahsil-Muranipur, District-Jhansi. In the basic year of the consolidation operation plot in question was recorded in the name of respondent no.4-Bhagwan Das. Against the basic year entry of the aforementioned plot in question petitioner no.1/ Nanhi Bai filed an objection under Section 9-A (2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as "U.P.C.H. Act") claiming to be bhumidar of the plot in question on the ground that the plot in question was given to petitioner's father by the Zamindar of the area on lease. Consolidation Officer framed issues in the aforementioned title objection filed by the petitioner and afforded opportunity to the parties to lead evidence in support of their cases. Consolidation Officer vide order dated 26.3.1981 decided the aforementioned title objection maintaining the basic year entry as well as expunged the entry of possession made in favour of the petitioner. In place of filing appeal against the order of Consolidation Officer dated 26.3.1981, petitioner filed a Civil Suit No-799 of 1982 for permanent injunction in respect to plot in question along with certain other plots impleading the respondent No-4 as defendant. The aforementioned civil suit was dismissed vide judgment dated 5.11.1984. The village in question was de-notified, under Section 52 of U.P.C.H. Act on 16.12.1985. Against the order of Consolidation Officer dated 26.3.1981, appeal under Section 11 (1) of U.P.C.H. Act along with the prayer for condonation of delay of about 6 years was filed by the petitioner before Settlement Officer of Consolidation on 20.1.1987. The aforementioned appeal was registered as Appeal No.22 and Assistant Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Jhansi vide order dated 26.4.1989 granted benefit of Section 5 of Limitation Act as well as allowed the appeal setting aside the order of Consolidation Officer dated 26.3.1981 and directed to record the name of