SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(All) 2486

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J. 
Suresh Singh – Appellant 
Versus
State Of Up And 13 Others – Respondent 
WRIT - B No. – 3894, 3336 of 2024
Decided on : 02-12-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : A.P.Singh
For the Respondent: Sachida Nand Tripathi,Adya Prasad Tewari,C.S.C.,Rakesh Yadav

Withdrawal applications in pending revisions must be substantiated by legal grounds; the validity of sale deeds takes precedence in ownership disputes.

Headnote:(A) U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 - Section 9-A (2) and Section 48 - Dispute regarding plot ownership - The Appeals of Suresh Singh against orders of the Consolidation Officer and Deputy Director of Consolidation were dismissed due to time-barred applications and lack of merit in claims against sale deeds executed to third parties - The Court noted that claims of the executed sale deeds cannot be ignored and the withdrawal application was devoid of merit. (Paras 1-16)

(B) Jurisdiction and Discretion - The Court emphasized the need for an expeditious hearing and the importance of affording fair opportunity to all parties involved in the consolidation process. (Para 16)

Facts of the case:
The dispute involved multiple objections and revisions regarding entries in the revenue records related to plots owned by Suresh Singh and others, which were challenged by Raj Kumari and others. The orders of the Consolidation Officer and Deputy Director raised issues regarding the validity of claims over the plots, particularly against the sale deeds executed in favor of third parties.

Findings of Court:
The Court upheld the decisions of the Deputy Director of Consolidation, determining that the Appeals and withdrawal application lacked sufficient legal support.

Issues: The core issues revolved around the legality of withdrawal applications and claims based on sale deeds against pending revisions.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the consolidation orders under dispute were legally sound and that claims made in the context of pending revisions by Suresh Singh were in bad faith.

Result: Writ petitions dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

Chandra Kumar Rai,J.

1. Heard Mr. A.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Adya Prasad Tewari, learned counsel for the respondent nos.3 to 6, Mr. Sachida Nand Tripathi, learned counsel for respondent no.7 and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents in Writ-B No.3894 of 2024.

2. Heard Mr. Adya Prasad Tewari, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sachida Nand Tripathi, learned counsel for respondent nos.3 to 6 and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents in Writ-B No.3336 of 2024.

3. Brief facts of the case are that dispute relates to plot of Khata Nos.73 & 74 situated in Village- Chakdaud, Tahsil- Sahjanwa, District- Gorakhpur. Against the the basic year entry of plot in question one objection was filed by Raj Kumari and Raj Kishori under Section 9 -A (2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as "U.P.C.H. Act") in respect to khata no.74 for expunging the name of Parasuram, Lalu & Chokat, the predecessor in interest of Suresh Singh. Another objection was filed by Parasuram, Lalu & Chokat for expunging the name of Raj Kumari and Raj Kishori daughters of Nirmal Singh in respect to khata no.73. Consolidation Officer vide order dated 24.12.2003 allowed the objection filed by Raj Kumari and Raj Kishori with respect to khata no.74. Against the order dated 24.12.2003 heirs of Parasuram, Lalu & Chokat filed a time barred restoration application on 23.10.2007 before the Consolidation Officer which was dismissed vide order dated 19.1.2011. In respect to khata no.73, Consolidation Officer vide order dated 28.6.1990 allowed the objection filed by Parasuram, Lal & Chokat, accordingly, Raj Kumari & Raj Kishori filed restoration application on 10.9.1990 for recalling the order dated 28.6.1990. Consolidation Officer vide order dated 20.3.1991 allowed the application and set aside the order dated 28.6.1990. Against the order dated 20.3.1991 passed by the Consolidation Officer, a time barred appeal was filed by legal heir of Lalu & Chokat, namely, Suresh Singh which was dismissed by the Settlement Officer of Consolidation vide order dated 7.3.2005. Suresh Singh and others filed a revision under Section 48 of U.P.C.H. Act against the order dated 20.3.1991 and 7.3.2005. The aforementioned revision was dismissed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation vide order dated 17.3.2008. Correction application filed on behalf of Raj Kumari & Raj Kishori in respect to revisional order dated 17.3.2008 was allowed on 4.6.2008 making necessary correction in the order dated 17.3.2008. Against the order dated 4.6.2008 passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation, Suresh Singh and Others filed a Writ-B No.36480 of 2008. The aforementioned Writ- B No.36480 of 2008 was heard finally by this Court and vide order dated 4.9.2014 the writ petition was allowed setting aside the order dated 4.6.2008 and matter was sent back before the Consolidation Officer to decide the objections of Suresh and Others as well as objection / cross objection filed by other parties in accordance with law. In pursuance of the order dated 4.9.2014 passed by this Court, the proceeding was started before the Consolidation Officer. In the aforementioned proceeding, an impleadment application dated 3.1.2018 was filed on behalf of Birendra Yadav and 11 others to implead them in the proceeding as plot in question has been purchased by them on the basis of registered sale deed dated 11.2.2002 & 21.4.2003. The aforementioned impleadment application was rejected by the Consolidation Officer vide order dated 27.2.2018 and fixed the proceeding for evidence of the parties. Consolidation Officer heard the objections on merit and dismissed the objection vide order dated 11.1.2019 filed by Suresh Singh and others with respect to khata no.73 maintaining the basic year entry of the khata no.73. Against the order dated 11.1.2019 passed by the Consolidation Officer, an appeal was filed by Suresh Singh before the Settlement Officer of Consolida

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top