Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 356 (HP)

SESH RAM v. RESHMU

2002-12-28

S.S.NEGI

body2002
ORDER S.S. Negi, IAS, FC.-These are two revision petitions under Section 17 of H.P. Land Revenue Act, 1954 one preferred by Shri Sesh Ram son of Chapu Ram and the second by Shri Nuradh Ram son of Birbal petitioners are directed against a common order dated 15.7.1997 passed by the Commissioner Mandi Division in case files No. 259/95 and 131/95 whereby the appeals filed by Smt. Reshmu the present respondent against the orders of Distt. Collector Kullu dated 20.4.1995 and 22.5.1995 respectively were accepted, and the orders of the Distt. Collector Kullu were set aside. 2. The facts of the case in brief are that the Assistant Collector IInd Grade attested two mutations i.e. mutation No. 900 and 903 on 1.2.1994 in favour of Smt. Reshmu, the present respondent in respect of hesitance of S/Sh. Fagnu and Jogi who reportedly died issueless. 3. Shri Sesh Ram son of Shri Chhapu filed two separate appeals before the Distt. Collector Kullu against the mutations on the grounds that the disputed property which was owned by one Shri Rirku, had 5 sons namely Shupu, Birbal, Chhapu, Fagnu and Jogi and his property was inherited by his five sons in equal shares, and that on the death of Sh. Chhapu, his property was inherited by his son Shri Sesh Ram and on the death of Shri Birbal, his property was inherited by his sons. It was contended that the property of Sh. Jogi deceased had to devolve on S/Shri Shupu and Fagnu who were real brothers of the deceased! And were alive at the time of death of Shri Jogi in consequence of| which the present petitioner S/Sh. Sesh Ram and Nuradh Ram being real nephews of the deceased and being legal heirs were entitled to inherit the estate of the deceased. It was further stated that the mutations under dispute were attested in their absence. 4. The learned Collector Kullu after hearing both the parties and going through the record held that since S/Shri Shupu and Fagnu both brothers of the deceased Sh. It was further stated that the mutations under dispute were attested in their absence. 4. The learned Collector Kullu after hearing both the parties and going through the record held that since S/Shri Shupu and Fagnu both brothers of the deceased Sh. Jogi were alive at the time of death of Shri Jogi, therefore the property should have been devolved on them and subsequently on their legal heirs, hence set aside the orders dated 1.2.1994 of the Assistant Collector IInd Grade vide order dated 20.1.1995 and 22.5.1995 and remanded the case to the Assistant Collector for attesting the mutation as per his directions. 5. against the orders of the Collector Distt. Kullu dated 20.4.1995 and 22.5.1995, Smt. Reshmu the present respondent filed two separate appeals before the Divisional Commissioner Mandi on the grounds that orders passed by the Distt. Collector Kullu on the appeals of the present petitioners dated 20.4.1995 and 22.5.1995 were based on conjectures and surmises and not on the facts as both the present petitioner S/Shri Sesh Ram and Nuradh Ram had no locus stand to file the appeals as they were not the legal heirs of Jogi deceased as such were not entitled to be afforded any opportunity of being heard. 6. The learned Commissioner after hearing both the parties and perusal of records set aside the orders passed by the Distt. Collector Kullu on dated 20.4.1995 and 22.5.1995 vide common order dated 15.7.1997 up-holding the order of the Assistant Collector IInd Grade dated 1.2.1994 passed on mutations No. 900 and 903. 7. Dissatisfied with this common order of the Commissioner Mandi Division dated 15.7.1997, S/Shri Sesh Ram and Nuradh Ram have filed these two revision petitions before this Court. 8. The records were requisitioned and the parties were afforded opportunity to address their arguments in the matter. 9. The learned Counsel for petitioner has argued that the property of said Jogi should have devolved on his surviving brothers in accordance with the provisions of Succession Act, as they were alive at the time of death of their brother. It was also submitted that after the death of Fagnu and Shupu, the property would devolve on the petitioners. It was accordingly requested that the revision be accepted and the order passed by the Distt. Collector Kullu be affirmed. . 10. It was also submitted that after the death of Fagnu and Shupu, the property would devolve on the petitioners. It was accordingly requested that the revision be accepted and the order passed by the Distt. Collector Kullu be affirmed. . 10. The learned Counsel for respondent has submitted that the respondents are the rightful successors of the deceased and the orders passed by the learned Commissioner are in order and be upheld. 11. After giving thoughtful consideration to the submissions made on behalf of both the sides, the contentions of the learned Counsel for petitioner appears to have substance. This is an admitted position that the said Jogi predeceased his real brothers Fagnu and Shupu i.e. they were alive at the time of death of their brother. That implies that the succession of said Jogi opened at the time when his real brothers were alive and therefore they were the legal heirs of the deceased. Even death of said Fagnu took place in the year 1982 when one of his real brothers Shupu was alive and therefore his estate should have devolved on him. 12. under these circumstances the Distt. Collector rightly set aside the orders on mutation No. 900 and 903 and remanded the matter to the Assistant Collector for attestation of mutations after affording opportunity to the petitioners and all other interested persons including respondents. The learned Commissioner wrongly set aside the order of learned Distt. Collector, for the reasons discussed hereinabove. The revision petitions are accepted and the impugned orders are set aside and the matter is remanded to the Assistant Collector for disposal in accordance with the aforesaid directions after hearing all the necessary parties. 13. Orders be communicated to the parties and the case file of this court be consigned to the record room after due completion.