Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT. FULMATIA versus S.D.O. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Smt. Fulmatia v. S.D.O. & Others - WRIT - C No. 15943 of 1984 [2007] RD-AH 2786 (20 February 2007)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

(Court No.28)

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.15943 of 1984

Smt. Fulmatia  vs.  Sub Divisional Officer, Banda and others

Hon.S.U.Khan,J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This writ petition is directed against order dated 5.10.1984 passed by Sub Divisional Officer, Banda in Appeal no. 2 A under Rule 6-A of Panchyat Raj Rules.  The appeal was filed against order dated 15.5.1981/28.5.1982 against order of District Panchyatraj Officer.  Appeal was earlier dismissed on 18.4.1984 thereafter review petition was filed on 21.5.1984.  Through the impugned order review petition was allowed and appeal was also allowed.  The said order dated 5.10.1984 is challenged through this writ petition.

It appears that the entire dispute between the parties was regarding date and place of death of Siyaram.  Earlier in the parivar register of village Pachnehi the date of death of Siyaram was mentioned as 5.3.1980 and place of death was mentioned as Hamirpur.  Through the impugned order allowing the review petition Sub Divisional Officer, Banda/appellate court held that date of death must be changed to 27.3.1980 and place of death to Pachnehi Nikara.

The reason of dispute is a sale deed dated 7.3.1980.  According to the contesting respondents Siyaram executed a sale deed in their favour on 7.3.1980.

The question of validity of sale deed cannot be determined by the authorities entrusted for maintaining parivar register. Entry in parivar register is merely a piece of evidence.  However, if litigation regarding sale deed dated 7.3.1980 had already started then any subsequent attempt of entry of date of death in parivar register would not be of much help.  The entire basis of impugned order dated 5.10.1984 is order of consolidation authorities holding the sale deed dated 7.3.1980 to be valid.

The date of death mentioned in parivar register is not conclusive.  It is merely a piece of evidence.  Consolidation authorities were within the jurisdiction to hold that the sale deed dated 7.3.1980 was valid.  However, on that basis it was not essential to change the entries of parivar register.

Accordingly, writ petition is allowed.   Impugned order is set aside.  However, it is clarified that whenever the question of death of Siyaram arises it must be decided on the basis of evidence and not much reliance shall be placed on the entries of parivar register as the attempt by both the parties in getting date of death of their own choice entered in the parivar register was aimed only and only for the purposes of challenging or defending the sale deed dated 7.3.1980.

20.2.2007

RS/-  


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.