Dismissed

Sudhir Kumar Singh v. Commissioner Devi Patan Mandal Gonda and 4 Others

Allahabad HC7 Mar 2024WRIC/2284/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking quashing of revenue orders. The petitioner, an adopted son, challenged the refusal of mutation. The court held that the petitioner failed to substantiate the earlier adoption deed due to lack of witness testimony. The pending civil suit regarding the later adoption deed does not warrant interference in the revenue proceedings.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; the writ petition was dismissed with the clarification that it will not affect the pending civil suit regarding the adoption deed.

Sudhir Kumar Singh vs Commissioner Devi Patan… — Succession and Inheritance | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:69451

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2284 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Sudhir Kumar Singh

¶5

Respondent :- Commissioner Devi Patan Mandal Gonda And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Divyanshu Singh,Divya Tripathi,Mohiuddin Khan,Mrs.Suniti Sachan

¶6

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Deepak Chandra Jain,Nagendra Pratap Singh,Pankaj Gupta

¶7

Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.

¶8

Heard Shri Mohiuddin Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Deepak Chandra Jain, learned counsel for the respondents no. 4, Shri Tej Bali Singh, learned standing counsel for the respondents no. 1 to 3 and Shri Pankaj Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5.

¶9

This writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 1.12.2023 passed by the opposite party no. 1 in Case No. 1657 of 2023 (Sudhir Kumar adopted Vs. Smt. Subha Singh and others) filed under section 210 of U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006 arising out of order dated 21.10.2023 passed by the opposite party no. 2 in Case No. 7103 of 2022 (Sudhir Kumar Singh Vs. Smt. Subha Singh and others) filed under section 207 of U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006 as well as the order dated 15.1.2020 passed by the opposite party no. 3 in Case No. RST/3494/2017 (Smt. Subha Singh Vs. Krishna Bahadur Singh) filed under secton 34 of the UP. Land Revenue Code, 2006.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was adopted by one Krishna Bahadur Singh, husband of the respondent no. 4 on 6.2.2003. Thereafter he continued to be adopted son and in all his educational records Shri Krishna Bahadur Singh was recorded as father of the petitioner. The said Krishna Bahadur Singh has died on 19.11.2008 and since he was in job and the petitioner wanted to apply for the compassionate appointment in his place, a formal registered adoption deed was executed for the said purpose on 30.5.2013 by the respondent no. 4 adopting the petitioner as her son. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the respondent no. 4 has not given NOC for the appointment of her adopted son on compassionate ground rather she was appointed on compassionate ground and also superannuated. Subsequent thereto a civil suit was filed by the respondent no. 4, the alleged adopted mother of the petitioner seeking cancellation of the adoption deed dated 30.5.2013, which was decreed ex-parte

¶11

vide judgement and order dated 26.9.2017. Against the said ex-parte order dated 26.9.2017 an application under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. has been moved by the petitioner which was allowed and the order dated 26.9.2017 was recalled and said suit for cancellation of adoption deed dated 30.5.2013 was restored to its original number and is pending adjudication.

¶12

An application under section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code has been moved by the respondent no. 4 for mutation of her name in place of late Krishna Bahadur Singh, which was objected by the petitioner and the said application has been rejected by the Tehsildar vide order dated 25.5.2017, against which an appeal was filed, which was allowed vide order dated 9.6.2017 and the matter was remanded back to the Tehsildar for fresh consideration. Thereafter, vide order dated 15.1.2020 the Tehsildar had set aside the mutation order dated 22.12.2009 and directed that the name of respondent no. 4-Smt. Subha Singh be entered in the revenue records. Against the order dated 15.1.2020, the petitioner has filed an appeal No. 7103 of 2022 under section 207 of U.P. Revenue Code, which was dismissed vide impugned order dated 21.10.2023 by the S.D.M. and the order dated 15.1.2020 was affirmed. Against the order dated 21.10.2023 the petitioner has preferred a Revision No. 1657 of 2023 under section 210 of U.P. Revenue Code which has also been dismissed vide impugned order dated 1.12.2023 by the Commissioner, Devi Patan Mandal, Gonda, against which the instant petition has been filed by the petitioner.

¶13

The claim of the petitioner is on the basis of one adoption deed dated 6.2.2003 which is allegedly executed by the husband of the respondent no. 4, which appears to have been produced before the Tehsildar. The witnesses of the said adoption deed have denied the execution of such adoption deed and therefore the Tehsildar held that when the husband and wife both were alive, the said adoption deed could not have been executed by the husband alone and the consent of the wife was required. In view thereof the petitioner has failed to prove the adoption deed dated 6.2.2003 since it was executed alone by late Krishna Bahadur Singh and therefore the same is not a valid document and cannot be taken into consideration for deciding the succession rights of the petitioner. With regard to the subsequent adoption deed dated 30.5.2013 is concerned, a civil suit for cancellation of the adoption deed is already pending consideration before the civil court.

¶14

For the aforesaid reasons, this court do no find any illegality in the impugned orders passed by the opposite parties. The writ petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed .

¶15

However, it is made clear that this order will not have any affect in the proceedings of the civil suit pending before the Civil Court for cancellation of the adoption deed dated 30.5.2013 and the same shall be decided by the Civil Court on its own merits without being influenced by any observation made in this order.

¶16

Order Date :- 15.10.2024 o.k.

¶17

(Anish Kumar Gupta, J)

¶18

Digitally signed by :- OM KRISHNA CHOUDHARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sudhir Kumar Singh v. Commissioner Devi Patan Mandal Gonda and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhir Kumar Singh v. Commissioner Devi Patan Mandal Gonda and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Siddharth Bhatt vs State of Up Others

Lala Ram Verma Vs State of U.P.and Another

Maan Singh Vishwakarma Alias Manjee Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Babu Lal and Others vs Deputy Director of Consolidation, Pratapgarh and Others

Babu Lal and Others vs Deputy Director of Consolidation, Pratapgarh and Others

Jaswant Singh and 8 Others vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Revenue Deptt. and 4 Others