Disposed

Smt. Nirmala Devi @ Mahura v. Deputy Director of Consolidation,Ayodhya Camp, Ambedkarnagar and 7 Others

Allahabad HC12 Jul 2024WRIB/279/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a Deputy Director of Consolidation order allowing a revision against her success before the Consolidation Officer and Settlement Officer, on the ground that attesting witnesses' statements to the will of Banarasi were on record as certified copies. Counter affidavit directed, notices issued, and interim status quo ordered with restraint on alienation.

What the court decided

AI extract

Smt. Nirmala Devi @ Mahura vs Deputy Director… — Succession and Inheritance | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 8

¶2

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 279 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- Smt. Nirmala Devi @ Mahura Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation,Ayodhya Camp, Ambedkarnagar And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pramod Kumar Chaudhary,Vijai Bahadur Verma

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Aditya Vikram Shahi

¶5

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J .

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Notice on behalf of the respondent no. 1 has been accepted by the office of the learned Chief Standing Counsel.

¶7

Sri Aditya Vikram Shahi, learned counsel has put in appearance for the respondent no. 5 on caveat.

¶8

Under challenge is the order passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation whereby the Revisional Court has allowed the revision rejecting the claims of the petitioner who had succeeded before the Court of Consolidation Officer as well as the Settlement Officer of Consolidation.

¶9

The submission is that the impugned order passed by the Revisional Court has been passed on the premise that the statements of the attesting witnesses on will executed by Sri Banarasi was not on record.

¶10

It is urged that this was an incorrect finding of fact, inasmuch as, the statements were duly recorded and the certified copies of the statements have also been filed before this Court along with the supplementary affidavit.

¶11

It is thus urged that the the premise upon which the order impugned has been passed is against the weight of the material on record.

¶12

Let the counter affidavit be filed by the respondent no. 5.

¶13

Notice be issued to the respondent nos. 2 to 4 and respondent nos. 6 to 8.

¶14

Step shall be taken within a week, returnable at an early date.

¶15

List this matter in the week commencing 02nd December, 2024.

¶16

As an interim measure, it is provided that the parties shall maintain status quo, as it exists today and none of the parties shall alienate or create any third party rights over the property in question.

¶17

O rder Date :- 23.10.2024 Asheesh

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ASHEESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt. Nirmala Devi @ Mahura v. Deputy Director of Consolidation,Ayodhya Camp, Ambedkarnagar and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Smt. Nirmala Devi @ Mahura v. Deputy Director of Consolidation,Ayodhya Camp, Ambedkarnagar and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sachchidanand and Another Vs Girja Sonkar and Others

Jaiwanti Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Another

Ram Sagar Yadav vs Co-Operative Tribunal, U.P. Lucknow Thru. Its Registrar and 6 Others

Lallu Gupta @ Ravi Chand Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Deptt.

Tamseel and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Anubhag Lko.

Abdul Rasheed @ Rashid Khan vs State of U.P. Thru. Teh Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Revenue and 3 Others