Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 412 (HP)

CHATAR SINGH v. MEHAR SINGH

2001-12-31

S.S.NEGI

body2001
ORDER S.S. Negi, IAS :- This revision petition under section 17 of H.P. Land Revenue Act. 1953 preferred by Shri Chattar Singh petitioner is against the order dated 18.6.1998 passed by the Commissioner. Shimla Division in revenue appeal No. 171/97 whereby the appeal filed by Shri Mehar Singh and Lal Singh (present respondent No.1 and 2) was accepted and the orders dated 16.5.1997 passed by the Collector Sub-Division Paonta Sahib were set-aside and the orders passed by the Assistant Collector. 1st grade. Paonta were maintained. 2. The facts of the case in brief are that on Shri Sobha Ram the present respondent No. 3 made an application dated 15.7.1994 to the Assistant Collector 1st Grade Paonta Sahib for partition of his share in land comprised in Khata/Khataoni No. 97/146 and 97/147 kita 7 measuring 19-10 Bighas situated in Village Bhup-pur. Tehsil Paonta Sahib held jointly by both the parties. The Assistant Collector 1st Grade after commencing the partition proceedings approved the mode of partition on 25.8.1994 and got the partition carried out as per mode of partition and finally sanctioned the instrument of partition vide order dated 3.2.1995. 3. Against this order Shri Chattar Singh the present petitioner filed an appeal before the Collector. Sub-Division Paonta Sahib on the grounds that he had not been allotted the equal share of land in each category of land. He contended that land abutting roadside on the main Badripur-Nahan Road was not equally partitioned and he was allotted less land on this road. 4. The learned Collector after hearing both the parties and going through the record held that the present petitioner had not been allotted land abutting road side that was of high commercial value in a fact developing area and accordingly accepted the appeal vide order dated 16.5.1997 and remanded the case to the Assistant Collector 1st Grade Paonta Sahib for carrying out partition by allotting equal land on the road side to all the co-sharers. 5. Aggrieved of this order of the Collector Sub-Division Paonta Sahib dated 16.5.1997 Shri Mehar Singh and Lal Singh (present respondent No.1 and 2) filed an appeal before the Commissioner. 5. Aggrieved of this order of the Collector Sub-Division Paonta Sahib dated 16.5.1997 Shri Mehar Singh and Lal Singh (present respondent No.1 and 2) filed an appeal before the Commissioner. Shimla Division on the grounds that the order of Collector remanding the case to the Assistant Collector 1st Grade was liable to be set-aside for the reason that the land allotted to Shri Chattar Singh (present petitioner) was more valuable in comparison to the land allotted to other co-shares as it was surrounded by Road from two sides and that the parties had improved their land by raising construction etc. in consequence of the partition. 6. The learned Commissioner after hearing both the parties and perusal of record concluded that the mode of partition was adhered during partition and Shri Chattar Singh had participated in the entire proceedings, and accordingly set-aside the order of the Collector by accepting the appeal vide order dated 18.6.1998. 7. Dis-satisfied with this order of the Commissioner dated 18.6.1998. the present revision petition, has been preferred by the petitioner in this court. 8. The records were requisitioned and the parties were called upon to address their arguments in support of their claims. The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated his contention that the land in khasra No. 306/93 has not been allotted equally amongst all the share holders as per their shares and the land is situated in a commercially viable place on a road on the Badripur road. The learned counsel for the respondent argued that the land has been equitably allotted to the share holders in accordance with the mode of partition, possession has also been delivered as a result of the said partition and parties respondents have also raised construction of house/shop etc. on the land fallen to their shares in the partition. A prayer was accordingly made to dismiss the revision petition. 9. After careful consideration of the submissions made on behalf of both the sides and perusal of record it is brought out that the dispute pertains to khasra No. 306/93 which measueres 8-18 bighas. This khasra No. has been allotted to various share holders as under:- Shri Mehar Singh I-16Bighas. Shri lal singh l-15Bighas. Shri Chattar Singh 1-15 Bighas. Shri Sobha Ram 1-16 Bighas. Smt. Krishni 1-16 Bighas. 10. This khasra No. has been allotted to various share holders as under:- Shri Mehar Singh I-16Bighas. Shri lal singh l-15Bighas. Shri Chattar Singh 1-15 Bighas. Shri Sobha Ram 1-16 Bighas. Smt. Krishni 1-16 Bighas. 10. The allotment of land comprising this khasra No. to various share holders have been made equitably by the Assistant Collector and a difference of 1 Biswa is within the specified deviation as provided for in clause 11 of the mode of partition. Therefore there has been equal distribution of land under this Kh. No. and it cannot be said that the partition in respect of this Kh. No. has been done in violation of the mode of partition. 11. Consequently the revision petition is without any force and is therefore dismissed. 12. Orders be communicated to the parties and the case file of this court be consigned to the record room after due completion.