JUDGEMENT

1 An order dated 26.04.2018 passed by the Joint Financial Commissioner with powers of Financial Commissioner, Revenue [‘FC] in a revision petition titled ‘Som Dutt vs Sansar Chand is subject matter of challenge in this petition.

Before I take up the grounds of challenge urged by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, a brief resume of the factual antecedents leading to filing of the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would be desirable.

Land in dispute in this case measures 2 kanals and falls in khasra No. 609 min [‘the subject land’]. The Subject land is classified as ‘Gair Mumkin Khud’ situate in village Dasgal, Tehsil Akhnoor, District Jammu and forms part of shamilat deh. As per the entries made in Jamabandi of 1957-

1958, the subject land is recorded in the possession of the owners of the village as ‘maqbooja malkaan’. The claim of the petitioner, as is projected by him throughout, is that the subject land was purchased by him from one Puran Chand son of Kunj Lal with possession through a registered Sale Deed dated 07.02.1994 and, accordingly, mutation No. 856 was attested in his favour on 28.11.2001. The petitioner further claims that out of the subject land purchased by him, 2 marlas of land was sold by him to one Anita Sharma wife of Romesh Chander on 14.08.2008 again through a duly registered sale deed. It is the case of the petitioner that he was in peaceful possession of the subject land and in the year 2010, the respondent appeared on the scene and challenged the sale deed executed by aforesaid Puran Chand in favour of the petitioner in the Court of learned Munsiff, Akhnoor. He submits that initially the Court of learned Munsiff granted an order of status quo, but the same was vacated by the Additional District Judge, Jammu on an appeal preferred by the petitioner.

4 The respondent had sought a decree of declaration from the learned Munsiff to declare the sale deed dated 07.02.1994 as null and void and had placed reliance upon an Agreement to Sell executed by Purcan Chand on 18.12.1993 in favour of the petitioner and the respondent in respect of 01 kanal each of the subject land. This led to the petitioner also filing a suit for declaration and permanent injunction to throw challenge to the Agreement to sell dated 18.12.1993 relied upon by the respondent. This suit is pending adjudication in the Court of City Judge, Jammu. This Court was further told that both the suits are now consolidated and are at final stage in the Court of City Judge, Jammu. It seems that simultaneously with launching of civil litigation by the parties, an appeal was also filed by the respondent against mutation No. 856 dated 28.11.2001 attested on the basis of sale deed executed by Puran Chand in favour of the petitioner.

5 The aforesaid appeal was filed before the Settlement Officer who vide his order dated 27.05.2011 allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned mutation and remanded the case to Tehsildar concerned for de novo enquiry and passing fresh orders in presence of the parties. This order of Settlement Officer was unsuccessfully challenged by the petitioner by filing an appeal before the Joint Settlement Commissioner with powers of Settlement Commissioner. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed a revision petition before the Financial Commissioner which came to be transferred to the Joint Financial Commissioner exercising the powers of Financial Commissioner (Revenue).

The said revision petition was considered by the FC who vide order impugned dated 26.04.2018 dismissed the revision petition, thus, upholding the order of Settlement Officer remanding the matter to the Tehsildar concerned for de novo enquiry.

6 In the backdrop of facts narrated above, order dated 26.04.2018 is called in question by the petitioner in this petition. The impugned order is challenged by the petitioner, inter alia, on the ground that a mutation attested on the basis of a Registered Sale Deed cannot be interfered wit