The presumption of correctness attached to revenue records can only be rebutted by evidence of impeccable integrity, and procedural rules regarding additional evidence must be followed during appeals.

JUDGMENT :

SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.

1. 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:

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 inheritence 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 extent of 1/2 as co-tenant and half share each in the name of sole appellant. Relevant part of the order is mentioned hereinafter:

13. It would be relevant to mention here that Consolidation Officer has rejected the right of respondents on Khata No. 254 since no documentary evidence was brought on record. However, appellants (respondents herein) have placed a photo copy of Khatauni of the year 1360 Fasli to 1369 Fasli, before the Appellate Authority wherein Khata No. 254 was recorded in the name of Smt.Sumari, therefore, respondents were granted right on this Khata also.

14. Original petitioner being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, filed a revision petition before Deputy Director of Consolidation, Azamgarh which was allowed in part vide order dated 25.1.1977 whereby the order passed by Settlement Officer of Consolidation was modified to the extent that name of Smt. Jagdei alone be recorded at Arazi Nos. 2011, 2125, 2127, 1891, 2010, 3863, 3864, 3865, 3866, 3889, 3890 and 2175. On remaining numbers, name of Nokhai was directed to be recorded along with Smt.Jagdei being half share. Relevant part of the order dated 2