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

2015 Supreme(UK) 304

UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.K. Bist
Writ Petition No. 794 of 2008 (M/S)
JIA-UL-HAQ & ORS. – Petitioners
Versus
SRI WALIDIN & ANR. – Respondents
Decided on : 12.10.2015

For the Petitioners:Mr. Santosh Tripathi, Mr. Aseem Chandra and Mr. Parikshit Saini, Advocates
For the Respondents:Mr. Lok Pal Singh and Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Advocates

Headnote:(A)Writ Jurisdiction – Supervisory Jurisdiction – Exercise of – Such jurisdiction can be exercised only when there seems to be apparent jurisdictional or illegal error in the impugned order taking away substantive right of the party – And that order passed in mutation proceedings is not the final order – It pertains to the mutation proceedings, party can get its title declared from the competent Court.

       (Para 5)

       (B)Writ Petition – Maintainability of – The writ petition arising out of mutation proceedings is not maintainable.(Para 6)

        ¼v½ fjV vf/kdkfjrk & i;Zos{k.k vf/kdkfjrk & iz;ksx & tc ikfjr vkns’k esa izR;{kr% vf/kdkfjrk ;k voS/k =qfV gks] tks fd i{kdÙkkZ ds lkjHkwr vf/kdkjksa dks nwj djs & vkSj ukekarj.k dk;Zokgh esa ikfjr vkns’k vafre vkns’k ugha gksrk] i{kdÙkkZ l{ke vnkyr }kjk LoRokf/kdkjh dh ?kks”k.kk djk ldrk gSA¼izLrj 5½

       ¼c½fjV ;kfpdk dh iks”k.kh;rk & ukekarj.k dk;Zokgh ls mn~Hkwr fjV ;kfpdk iks”k.kh; ughaA ¼izLrj 6½

JUDGMENT :

Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J.

Present petition has been filed by the petitioners for quashing the judgment & orders dated 03.01.2008 & 07.05.2008 passed by the Commissioner, Garhwal Division, Camp Dehradun and the Additional Chief Revenue Commissioner, Uttarakhand, Dehradun respectively.

2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that Shri Abdul Haq, son of Imamudin was the owner in possession of the property in dispute, bearing Khevat No. 6 Bharuwala, Pargana Kendriya Doon, Tehsil and District Dehradun. Shri Abdul Haq had two issues i.e. son Anwar-Ul-Haq and daughter Mrs. Allaha De. Anwar-Ul-Haq had two sons, namely, Jia-Ul-Haq and Rizwan-Ul-Haq. Rizwan-Ul-Haq had four sons, namely, Shakir, Atir, Nasir and Sahid, whereas Mrs. Allaha De has two sons, namely, Mohd. Ahmad and Dilshad. After the death of Abdul Haq, name of his son Anwar-Ul-Haq and daughter Mrs. Allaha De were recorded in the revenue record. Anwar-Ul-Haq died in the year 1973, leaving behind two sons, namely, Jia-Ul-Haq and Rizwan-Ul-Haq, hence, as per Muslim Law his share would be succeeded/inherited by Jia-Ul-Haq, the petitioner no. 1 and Rizwan-Ul-Haq. Rizwan-Ul-Haq also expired on 01.07.1995, leaving behind his four sons, namely, Shakir, Atir, Nasir and Sahid (petitioner nos. 2 to 5), who had inherited/succeeded share of Rizwan-Ul-Haq. After the death of Anwar-Ul-Haq, Shri Jia-Ul-Haq and his brother Rizwan-Ul-Haq and after the death of Rizwan-UI-Haq, his sons i.e. petitioner nos. 2 to 5 came into actual physical possession of the property in dispute along with Mrs. Allaha De. Mrs. Allaha De expired on 09-01-1998, leaving behind her son Mohd. Ahmad and daughter Ms. Taslim as her legal heirs, who succeeded/inherited her share in the property in dispute as per Muslim Law and came into actual physical possession of the property as co-sharer. The petitioners applied for mutation of their names in the revenue record as legal/natural heirs of Anwar-Ul-Haq and Mrs. Allah De. Respondent nos. 1 and 2 also applied for mutation in the revenue record over the property in dispute saying that Anwar-Ul-Haq had executed a Will dated 01-05-1972 in their favour and as per his last Will dated 01-05-1972, their names should be mutated in revenue record. Initially, the matter was heard by Tehsildar, Dehradun, but since the property was/is a Non-Z.A. property, hence case was transferred to the Collector, Dehradun for mutation. Learned Collector, Dehradun, vide his judgment & order dated 11-04-2007, directed to mutate the names of the petitioners in the revenue record, having observed that the petitioners are the natural legal heirs of Anwar-Ul-Haq and Mrs. Allaha De. Learned Collector did not find the alleged Will dated 01-05-1972 having been proved. Aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the Collector, Dehradun, respondents preferred an appeal in the Court of Commissioner, Garhwal Division, Camp Dehradun under Section 219 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act. Learned Commissioner, Garhwal Division, Camp Dehradun, vide his impugned judgment & order dated 03-01-2008, allowed the appeal of the respondents by observing that they have inherited the disputed property on the basis of the Will of Anwar-Ul-Haq. Against the order dated 03.01.2008, the petitioners preferred revision, being Revision No. 80/2007-08, in the Court of Chief Revenue Commissioner, Uttarakhand, Dehradun, which was dismissed by impugned judgment & order dated 07-05-2008. In the meantime, the petitioners approached the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dehradun and filed Original Suit, bearing O.S No. 456 of 2008, seeking declaration that the Will dated 01-05-1972 shall be declared null and void. The said Original Suit has been decreed in total on 28-05-2009 and the decree became final, as till today neither has been stayed by any Court nor being set aside by any Court of law, as such the application under Order 9 Rule 13 of C.P.C. filed by the respondents is pending. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and orders dat












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