The Revisional Court under Section 48 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act can review evidence and findings from lower authorities, affirming its jurisdiction to determine land ownership disputes.

JUDGMENT :

Chandra Kumar Rai, J.

1. Heard Sri Manoj Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

2. Brief facts of the case that Khata No. 242 situated in Village Baroda was recorded in the name of Chandi Lal, Bhoop Singh, Sohan Lal, Ratan Lal, Chandrapal Sons of Ganga Sahai, Mohan Lal son of Sukha. The family pedigree, which is admitted to both parties is as under:-

In C.H. Form 5 share of every person in respect to Khata No. 242 was mentioned as 1/6 each. Several set of objection under Section 9 A(2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 hereinafter referred to as U.P.C.H. Act were filed with respect to share in Khata No. 242. Ist set of objection was filed by Mohan Lal (father of respondent no. 4,5 & 6) claiming 1/2 share as plot in question was ancestral & acquired by common ancester Meru. IInd set of objection was filed by Chandi Lal (respondent no. 7) stating the plot in dispute was acquired by his father Ganga Sahai as such he is entitled to 1/5 share and name of Mohan Lal is liable to be expunged. IIIrd set of objection was filed by Chandrapal (Petitioner) stating that Bhoop Singh had executed a sale deed in his favour in respect to plot no. 315 area 10 Biswa as such name of Bhoop Singh be expunged. On the basis of objection of the parties following four issues were framed:-

(i) whether name of Mohan Lal was recorded in fraudulent manner in the disputed plots?

(ii) whether disputed plots are ancestral?

(iii) what is share of the parties?

(iv) whether Chandrapal is exclusive bhumidhar of Plot No. 315 on the basis of sale-deed?

Parties have adduced evidence in support of their cases. Consolidation Officer after hearing the parties and considering the evidences on record vide order dated 15.11.1988 allowed the objection of Mohan Lal and Chandilal, but rejected the objection of Chandrapal. The Consolidation Officer ordered for division of share of Khata No. 242 in following manner:-

(i) Chandi Lal - 1/6

(ii) Sohan Lal - 1/6

(iii) Ratan Lal - 1/6

(iv) Chandrapal - 1/6

(v) Mohan Lal - 1/6

(vi) Kaluwa - 1/12 & Jag Veer-1/12

Against the order of Consolidation Officer dated 15.11.1988 two appeals under Section 11 (1) of U.P.C.H. Act were filed before Settlement Officer of Consolidation, which were registered as appeal no. 1146 Ramesh and others Vs. Chandi Lal and Others and appeal no. 1152 Chandrapal Vs. Ramesh and otehrs. The Settlement Officer Consolidation vide order dated 19.02.1994 dismissed the appeal no. 1146 and allowed the appeal no. 1152 expunging the name of Mohan Lal from Khata No. 242 and share of the parties was declared in following manner:-

i) Sohan Lal - 1/5 share

ii) Ratan Lal - 1/5 share

iii) Chandi Lal 1/5 share

iv) Chandrapal - 1/5 share

v) Kaluwa - 1/10 share

vi) Jagveer - 1/10 share

Against the appellate order dated 19.02.1994 a revision under Section 48 of U.P.C.H. Act was filed by Ramesh and others before the Deputy Director of Consolidation, which was registered as Revision No. 1644. The aforementioned revision was allowed vide order dated 18.10.1997 setting aside the order of the Consolidation Officer dated 15.11.1988 as well as Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 19.02.1994 and the share of the parties in the Khata No. 242 was declared in following manner:-

i) Ramesh, Suresh, Mahesh sons of Mohan Lal - 1/6 share each

ii) Chandi Lal, Sohan Lal, Ratan Lal, Chandrapal - 1/10 share each.

iii) Kaluwa, Jagveer sons of Bhoop Singh - 1/20 share each

The order passed by Settlement Officer Consolidation in respect to sale-deed was maintained. Restoration Applications filed by petitioner as well as respondent no. 7 to 11 against the revisional order dated 18.10.1997 were rejected by Deputy Director of Consolidation vide order dated 10.l1.2000 on the ground that earlier dated 18.10.1997 was passed on merit. Hence, this writ petition on behalf of petitioner for following relief:-

i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari after calling the records o