Disposed

Raj Mal v. Addl.Director of Consolidation

Punjab & Haryana HC27 Jan 2014CWP/19271/1997

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed an inquiry by the Additional Director, Consolidation of Holdings, to determine if the deceased petitioner was familiar with the gurumukhi script. The bench held that since the original records were burnt, a factual inquiry is necessary to decide the validity of consolidation pleadings before reaching a final conclusion.

What did the court decide?

Summons issued for the parties to appear before the Additional Director, Consolidation, Jalandhar on 10.02.2014 to undertake the necessary inquiry within three months.

Raj Mal Vs Addl.Director of Consolidation — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

C. W. P. No. 19271 of 1997 (O&M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Sr. No. 102+201

¶5

Case No. : C. W. P. No. 19271 of 1997 (O&M) Date of Decision : January 27, 2014

¶6

Raj Mal (dead through LRs) .... Petitioner(s) vs. Additional Director, Consolidation of Holdings, Punjab, Jalandhar and others .... Respondents

¶7

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI.

¶8

¶9

Present : Mr. K. S. Dadwal, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

¶10

Mr. Alok Jain, Addl. A. G., Punjab for respondents no. 1 and 2.

¶11

Mr. P. C. Rakra, Advocate for respondents no. 3 to 7.

¶12

¶13

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, C. J. (Oral) :

¶14

C. M. No. 696 of 2014 :

¶15

Leave is granted to respondents no. 3 to 7 to file the documents

¶16

Annexures R-4 to R-7 and the application is allowed.

¶17

C. M. No. 826 of 2014 :

¶18

Leave is granted to the petitioners to place on record additional

¶19

Monika 2014.01.28 17:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶20

C. W. P. No. 19271 of 1997 (O&M)

¶21

¶22

affidavit along with Annexures P-9 and P-10 and the application is accordingly allowed.

¶23

Main Case :

¶24

The controversy inter se the parties has been set out by us in our order dated 04.12.2013. Thereafter also, some documents have been brought on record. The basic issue, however, remains as to whether the deceased petitioner Raj Mal was present at the time of the consolidation proceedings. Late Shri Raj Mal and now his legal heirs seek to deny the presence as well as signatures appearing thereon, purported to be of deceased Raj Mal, on the ground that he did not know gurumukhi . On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents no. 3 to 7 seeks to produce other material to show that the deceased was conversant with gurumukhi and in more than one situations, had signed in gurumukhi and thus, this plea is false. We have already noticed that unfortunately the records relating to the consolidation proceedings had since got burnt, as informed to us.

¶25

The question, which has to be examined, thus, would be whether the deceased Raj Mal was or was not conversant with gurumukhi and whether he used to sign in the said language. If it is established that the deceased Raj Mal was appending signatures in gurumukhi , then it would be difficult for his legal heirs to now get out of the consolidation proceedings

¶26

Monika 2014.01.28 17:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶27

C. W. P. No. 19271 of 1997 (O&M)

¶28

¶29

order as even those records are not available and more so, the case is predicated on reasoning of late Raj Mal being unfamiliar with gurumukhi . On the other hand, case of respondents no. 3 to 7 is that late Raj Mal used to sign in gurumukhi.

¶30

We are, thus, of the view that inquiry in this behalf is required to be made by production of documents by both the sides is to establish as to whether late Raj Mal was or was not familiar with gurumukhi.

¶31

Since the aforesaid issue was receiving attention of the Additional Director, Consolidation, this issue would have to be re-visited by the said authority. In case, a finding is reached that late Raj Mal used to sign in gurumukhi , then Annexure P-8 would hold, while the result would be to the contrary, if it is found that late Raj Mal never signed in gurumukhi and knew only Urdu language.

¶32

We may note that as per Annexure P-8, all that has been stated is that in view of his signatures on the proceedings, he was present at the relevant time when the consolidation order was passed.

¶33

We thus dispose of the present petition with the aforesaid direction and the concerned officer to take the necessary decision within a maximum period of three months from today.

¶34

The interim orders would continue to operate till such time as the aforesaid decision is taken and the parties would abide by the final

¶35

Monika 2014.01.28 17:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶36

C. W. P. No. 19271 of 1997 (O&M)

¶37

¶38

result of such enquiry.

¶39

The parties to appear before the Additional Director

¶40

Consolidation, Jalandhar on 10.02.2014 at 03:00 P. M.

¶41

( SANJAY KISHAN KAUL ) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶42

January 27, 2014

¶43

monika

¶44

( ARUN PALLI ) JUDGE

¶45

Monika 2014.01.28 17:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Raj Mal v. Addl.Director of Consolidation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Mal v. Addl.Director of Consolidation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

(O&M) M/S Harnam Singh Hardwari Lal Kalanwali Vs Cotton Corporation of India

M/S Oswal Seed Firm & Ors. Vs Authorized Officer, State Bank of India Shah Bad Markanda

Virender Singh Vs Punjab National Bank & Anr.

Jagdish Vs State of Haryana

Om Parkash and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

P.A. No. 30908 Barkha Ram & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.