The presumption of truth attached to revenue records can only be rebutted by evidence of impeccable integrity, and procedural fairness must be upheld in appeals.

JUDGMENT

Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.

Heard Sri. Ram Pratap Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Aqeel Ahmad, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. In the present case dispute arose during consolidation proceedings in regard to Khata Nos.333 and 254 which were recorded in the basic year in the name of original petitioner (Nokhai).

3. An objection was filed by Raghubar, (original respondent no.4).

4. Case of objectors was that land in dispute belonged to one Pheru and after his death it was inherited by Smt. Sumari being his widow who died later on in the year 1953. It was further contended by them that Smt. Sumari left behind two daughters namely Smt. Jagdei and Smt. Hardei who inherited the holding.

5. Raghubar claimed his right as heir of Smt. Hardei as her husband. Smt. Jagdei claimed her rights as daughter of Pheru and Smt. Sumari.

6. A counter objection was filed by original petitioner Nokhai claiming that land in dispute was a joint family property. He was a co-tenant with Smt. Sumari who relinquished her share in his favour in the year 1953 by an agreement. On basis of said agreement, mutation was also recorded and his name was alone recorded till the commencement of consolidation proceedings. Original petitioner has denied claim of original respondent no.4 (Smt. Jagdei and Smt. Hardei) that they were not daughters of aforesaid Pheru, but daughters of another Pheru a resident of same village.

7. Earlier same dispute was raised between parties which came up to High Court also at interim stage, however since consolidation commenced, therefore, abated.

8. The Consolidation Officer vide order dated 21.2.1975 dismissed objections filed by Raghubar and original respondent no.4. Relevant part of said order is extracted below:

^^iSekb'k fnukad 12] 11] 14 o 20] 8] 17 ds voyksdu ls Li"V Kkr gksrk gS fd Qs: pekj ckx cgkj dh nks yMfd;kWa iSnk gqbZ Fkh txnsbZ dh voLFkk 60 o"kZ crk;h x;h gS vkSj og bl izdkj 1914 dh iSnk gqbZ izrhr gksrh gS ysfdu dksbZ Hkh dkxtkr [kkrk 254 ds lEcU/k esa ugh fn;k x;k gS fd Kkr gks lds fd fookfnr Hkwfe ds Hkh QS: ds uke vafdr Fkk vr% Qs: ds LFkku ij ojklru dk izJ ugha mBrk gS ;g [kkrk rugk uks[kbZ ds uke gS vkSj mldk rugk dCtk Hkh xokg ds c;ku o ekyxqtkjh dh jlhnksa ls Kkr gS vr% oknhx.k j?kqoj o txnsbZ dk lR; izekf.kr ugha gksrk gS nhokuh ds U;k;ky;ksa ds fu.kZ; dk oS/kkfud egRo ugha gS D;ksafd og vcsV gks x;s gSA oknhx.k ds xokg fclbZ iq= dju dk c;ku Hkh nq'euh dks izekf.kr djrk gS vr% mls fudky nsus ds ckn Jherh gjnsbZ dh 'kgknrLorU= jg tkrh gSA

vr% rudhg dk fu.kZ; fo:) j?kqoj Jherh txnsbZ fn;k x;kA rudhg ua0 5 o 6%& bl [kkrk dh Hkwfe ds lEcU/k esa oknhx.k dk dksbZ nkok ugha gSA vr% fcuk fookn ds mudk gd fu.kZ; ugha fd;k tk ldrk gS rlnhd [krkSuh ds le; Jherh lksekjh dk mRrjkf/kdkjh uks[kbZ fy[kk x;k gS mlh dk dCtk Hkh xkVk la0 2110@&330 ij fy[kk x;k gSA nksuks rudhg dk fu.kZ; cgd uks[kbZ fn;k x;k gSA**

9. As referred above, Consolidation Officer has held that there was no document which could suggest that the land in dispute (Khata No.254) was in name of Pheru, therefore, there was no right of inheritance of Pheru and land in dispute was recorded in name of original petitioner (Nokhai). It was also noted that since other civil proceedings were abated, therefore, orders passed therein have no legal consequence.

10. Above referred order was challenged by Raghubar and Smt. Jagdei jointly. Other objectors have not challenged the said order.

11. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that appeal was belatedly filed.

12. Assistant Settlement Officer of Consolidation vide order dated 15.12.1975 allowed the appeal of respondent in part and modified order of Consolidation Officer to extent that only Arazi Nos.2011, 2925, 2127, 1891, 2010, 3863, 3864, 3865, 3866, 3889, 3890 and 2175 of Khata No.254 be recorded in the name of sole appellant and name of original petitioner was expunged. However, in regard to other numbers, name of contesting respondents along with Nokhai was recorded to the