Back
JASPREET SINGH
Chhanga – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Director Of Consolidation – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Jaspreet Singh, J.)
1. Heard Sri U.S. Sahai, learned counsel for the petitioners.
2. In the instant petition, the original petitioners namely Chhanga and Bashir have assailed the order dated 08.09.1978 passed by the Consolidation Officer, Mishrik, District Sitapur. The other order under challenge is dated 12.08.1980 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Sitapur, as a consequence, the claim of co-tenancy claimed by the private respondents which was upheld by the Consolidation Officer did not find favour with the Settlement Officer of Consolidation but in revision before the Deputy Director of Consolidation, the order of SOC was set aside and the order of CO was upheld.
3. During pendency of the instant petition, the private respondent nos. 3, 4 and 5 have died and their legal heirs have been brought on record. The petitioners also moved another application bearing No. 104261 of 2013 indicating that the original petitioners have sold their share in favour of the applicants who have moved the said application for impleadment.
4. Even though, the said application remained pending, some of the applicants expired and another application bearing No. 159033 of 2021 was
The burden of proof lies on the party claiming co-tenancy, and long-standing revenue records cannot be disturbed without substantial evidence.
To establish co-tenancy rights over ancestral property, the unchanged identity of the land throughout generations must be shown, which was not proven in this case.
Claims of co-tenancy require proof of continuous identity of property in the name of a common ancestor; failure to establish this results in dismissal.
To establish co-tenancy rights in ancestral property, claimants must prove the unbroken identity of the holding over time, which the petitioners failed to do.
Point of law : There is no presumption of a property being joint family property only on account of existence of a joint Hindu family. The one who asserts has to prove that property is a joint family....
To establish co-tenancy rights, it must be shown that property has come down intact from a common ancestor without change in identity.
The burden of proof for co-tenancy claims lies with the claimant, and reliance on inadmissible evidence can invalidate such claims.
A recorded tenant's consent is essential for an unrecorded co-tenant to acquire Bhumidhari rights; absence of such consent invalidates claims to ownership.
The court emphasized the necessity of establishing evidence for claims of co-tenancy and inheritance, ruling that the Deputy Director's findings lacked sufficient support.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
