Back
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J.
Shiva Nath and Another - Appellant
Versus
D.D.C., Varanasi and Others - Respondent
Writ - B No. - 21098, 30514 of 2002
Decided On : 28-03-2014
Consolidation of Holdings Act - Land Dispute - 1953 - [U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953] - The court discussed the provisions of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 and its application in resolving the land dispute. The court emphasized the importance of proving joint family property and the burden of proof in establishing self-acquisition. The court also highlighted the requirement for the property to have come down intact and in identical form to uphold the claim of co-tenancy rights.
Fact of the Case:
The dispute involved multiple objections filed by different parties claiming rights over specific plots of land. The Consolidation Officer and subsequent authorities dismissed the objections, leading to the filing of writ petitions by the aggrieved parties.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the land in dispute was self-acquired property of Ganesh and his descendants, dismissing the claims of co-tenancy by other parties. The court emphasized the lack of evidence to prove joint family property and the absence of sufficient nucleus to acquire the property.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the ownership and co-tenancy rights over the disputed land, as well as the validity of surrender deeds and lease documents.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the burden of proof in establishing joint family property and the requirement for sufficient nucleus to acquire the property. It also highlighted the need for the disputed holding to have come down intact and in identical form to uphold the claim of co-tenancy rights.
Final Decision: The writ petitions were dismissed, affirming the findings of the consolidation authorities regarding the self-acquired nature of the disputed land and the lack of evidence to support co-tenancy claims.
Ram Surat Ram (Maurya),J.
1. Heard Sri C.K. Rai and Sri Lal Babu Lal and for the petitioners and Sri M.N. Singh, for the respondents.
2. The writ petitions have been field against the orders of Consolidation Officer dated 12.07.1999, Assistant Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 17.09.2001 and Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 19.03.2002 passed in title proceeding under U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
3. The dispute relates to the land of khata no.8 of village Sagahat pargana Dehat Amanat, district Varanasi. Khata 8 consists of plots. 2, 106, 122, 130, 131,134, 199, 204, 286, 287 and 323 (total area 6.59 acres). The dispute further relates to land of khata 6 and 39 of village Meerapur, pargana Dehat Amanat, district Varanasi. These khatas consisted of plots 63/2, 64/2, 80/1, 81/3, 84, 97, 101, 108, 112 and 174, (total area 2-17-15 bigha). In basic consolidation record khatas in dispute were recorded in the names Kalawati wife of Munshi Lal. Following objections were filed by the different parties in the land in dispute.
(a) One Jangaliram filed an objection claiming to be co-sharer in the land in dispute. He claimed that the land in dispute belonged to Ganesh and after his death, it was inherited by his two sons Bhaggu and Ayodhya. The share of Ayodhya was inherited by Kalawati while the share of Bhaggu was inherited by his daughter Ahilya, who was mother of Jangaliram. After the order of the Consolidation Officer, rejecting the claim of Jangaliram, he did not file any appeal and the order of the Consolidation Officer has become final against him.
(b) The other objection was filed by Salik and Ram Adhar (respondents-7 and 8). They claimed their right over plots 2, 199 and 286 of village Saghat. It has been stated by Salik and Ram Adhar that Ayodhya surrendered these three plots in favour of Zamindar in the year 1945 and thereafter Zamindar executed a lease deed dated 07.05.1950 of these plots in their favour and on the basis of that lease deed they became sirdar of the land in dispute. The claims of Salik and Ram Adhar were ultimately rejected by Deputy Director of Consolidation and they have also not file any writ petition as such the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation has become final against them.
(c) Shivnath and Achhaiber, the petitioners also filed an objection claiming co-tenancy of 1/3 share in the land in dispute. It has been stated by the petitioners that the land in dispute was initially the property of Sukkal and Lattan sons of Churaman and after their death it was inherited by six sons of Sukhal, namely Munni, Mahesh, Sommar, Ganesh, Gopi and Moti but Ganesh was Karta of the family as such his name alone came to be recorded in the revenue records in the representative capacity. Out of six sons, two sons, namely, Munni and Mahesh died issueless and were inherited by his remaining brothers. Branch of Ganesh was inherited by Ayodhya and after his death by his daughter Smt. Kalawati. They belonged to branch of Moti as such they have 1/3 share in it.
(d) One Sunder also filed an objection, claiming his right by way of adverse possession over plot 102. One Bhola filed objection claiming adverse possession over plots 194, 212 and 286. These objections were dismissed by Consolidation Officer and they did not challenge the order of Consolidation Officer.
4. All the aforesaid objections were consolidated and tried by the Consolidation Officer. Before the Consolidation Officer apart from documentary evidence, Balli, Ram Adhar, Harpat, Shivnath, Bihari and Munshi were examined as witnesses. The Consolidation Officer by order dated 12.07.1999 held that the alleged surrender deed dated 09.07.1945 is void inasmuch as on the date of surrender by Ayodhya, Ganesh was alive and Ayodhya had no right to surrender the land in dispute. He further found that due to execution of the alleged patta dated 07.02.1950 in favour of Salik and Ram Adhar over three plots claimed by
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
