Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 21 (HP)

Rajiv Kumar v. Hans Raj

2017-01-06

NARINDER CHAUHAN

body2017
ORDER Narinder Chauhan, I.A.S. —These revision petitions under section 17 of the H.P. Land Revenue Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as " the Act"), have been preferred against the order dated 20.07.2016, passed by the Ld. Commissioner, Mandi Division, in Case Nos. 294/10 and 295/10, whereby the revision petitions of the present petitioners have been held to have abated for failure to bring on record the LRs of deceased respondent. 2. I have heard the Id. Counsel for the petitioners, who reiterated the grounds of the revision petition and argued that the petitioners had filed an application for bringing on record the legal heirs of deceased respondent but on account of non-availability of the address they could not file the processing fee for their service, and the Id. Commissioner has wrongly ordered the abatement of the proceedings, as such, the order is wrong and illegal. Ld. Counsel further averred that the under H.P. Land Revenue Act, 1954, the partition proceedings do not abate Ld Counsel submitted that the LRs of deceased respondents Mool Raj, Prema, Durgi, Mohan Lal and Sant Ram, have already been brought on record by way of filing separate applications. Lastly, it has been urged that the matter may be remitted to the Id. Commissioner, Mandi Division for providing an opportunity of being heard to the Ld. Commissioner, Mandi Division for providing an opportunity of being heard to the LRs of deceased and justice be done. 3. I have considered the arguments of advanced on behalf of the petitioners and have also gone through the contents of the revision petitions as well as the impugned orders. From the perusal of the copy of impugned orders passed by the Id. Commissioner, although it reveals that the petitioners have failed to bring on record the legal heirs of deceased respondents No. 1 (b)(i) despite several opportunities w.e.f. 29.3.2016 to 20.7.2016, but open this technical ground other co-sharers should not be allowed to suffer. Moreover, as per provisions of? Rule 35 of the Punjab Land Revenue rules (applicable to H.P) the proceedings in partition cases cannot be abated on account of death of one of the parties or on marriage of a female, who is a party to the revenue proceedings. The Rule 35 of the Punjab Land Revenue Rules(applicable to H.P.) reproduced below:- "Rule 35. Rule 35 of the Punjab Land Revenue rules (applicable to H.P) the proceedings in partition cases cannot be abated on account of death of one of the parties or on marriage of a female, who is a party to the revenue proceedings. The Rule 35 of the Punjab Land Revenue Rules(applicable to H.P.) reproduced below:- "Rule 35. The death of one of the parties to a revenue proceedings, or in a proceeding to which a female is a party, her marriage shall not cause the proceedings to abate. And the Revenge Officer before whom the proceeding is held shall have power to make the successor in interest of the deceased or of the marriage female a party thereto." As such, in the revenue proceedings the legal heirs of deceased have to be reflected/shown in the pedigree table and the right of each such right holder/co-sharer is to be protected as per their entitlements. 4. In view of the above, the abatement orders passed by the Id. I Commissioner dated 20.7.2016, are revoked and both the revision petitions are hereby ordered to be restored to its original stage/number and the matters are remitted to Id. Commissioner, Mandi Division with the direction to proceed further in both the case Nos.294/2010 and 295/2010, and to decide the same on merits in accordance with law. The petitioners are also mandated to co-operate and furnish necessary addresses etc. or whatever is necessary for adjudication of the matters on merit, immediately. Both the revision petitions, are accordingly disposed off. A copy of the order be sent to the Id. Commissioner, Mandi Division. 5. Announced in open court today the 6th January, 2017 at Mandi. The file of this court be consigned to the record room after due completion.