Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Smt. Margshri v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - C No. 51507 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 16248 (18 September 2006)


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).


Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.  51507 of 2006

Smt. Margshri ...............Petitioner


State of U.P. & Others........Respondents

Hon'ble Krishna Murari,J.

Heard Sri S. K. Lal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Raj Kishore Yadav appearing for contesting respondent no. 4 to 7.

This writ petition arises out of proceedings under Section 34 of U.P. Land Revenue Act (for short the ''Act'). On the death of recorded tenure holder Bachan Singh, an application was filed by the contesting respondents no. 4 to 7 for mutation of their names on the basis of an unregistered will alleged to have been executed in their favour. The said application was rejected by the Tehsildar vide order dated 31.1.2003 on the ground that they failed to prove the will. During the pendency of the proceedings, the name of the petitioner who was wife of deceased came to be recorded in place of deceased on the basis of ''Pa ka 11'. In the meantime, the contesting respondents went up in appeal against the order rejecting their claim. The appellate court vide order dated 8.12.2003 allowed the appeal and remanded the case back for decision afresh. The petitioner challenged the said order by filing revision, which has also been dismissed. The dispute is between mother and daughters.

It is well settled that mutation proceedings are summary in nature and there is always alternative remedy of adjudication of title by filing a suit on regular side. Equally well settled is the proposition that writ petition challenging the order passed in mutation proceeding is not to be normally entertained since the proceedings are summary in nature and subject to decision by court of competent jurisdiction. Reference may be made to the decision of this Court rendered in the case of Lal Bachan Vs. Board of Revenue, U. P., Lucknow and others, 2002(1), AWC-169 and Bindeshwari Vs. Board of Revenue and others, 2002 (1) AWC 498.

Even otherwise, order impugned is an order of remand by which the Tehsildar has been directed to decide the proceedings afresh after notice and opportunity of hearing to all concerned who are claiming to be mutated in place of deceased tenure holder. For this reason also, the impugned orders do not call for any interference. The writ petition accordingly fails and is dismissed.



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


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 |

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