vkns'k 1- ;g fuxjkuh vij vk;qä pacy laÒkx] eqjSuk d¢ çdj.k Øekad 208@ 1997&98@vihy esa ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 31-1-2002 d¢ fo#) e-ç- Òw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼ftls vkxs lafgrk dgk tk,xk½ dh èkkjk 50 d¢ rgr is'k dh xà gSA 2- çdj.k dh i`"BÒwfe ;g gS fd rglhy fÒ.M d¢ xzke Ò©uiqjk esa fLFkr fookfnr Òwfe d¢ vfÒfyf[kr ÒwfeLokeh cy flag iq= vtqZu flag FksA vfÒfyf[kr ÒwfeLokeh cyflag dh e`R;q d¢ ckn fookfnr Òwfe dk ukekarj.k olh;rukes d¢ vkèkkj ij jktLo fujh{kd }kjk vkosndx.k d¢ uke ij fd;k x;kA jktLo fujh{kd }kjk ikfjr vkns'k d¢ fo#) vukosndx.k }kjk vuqfoÒkxh; vfèkdkjh d¢ le{k vihy çLrqr dh xÃA vuqfoÒkxh; vfèkdkjh] fÒ.M }kjk vihy fujLr dh xÃA vukosndx.k }kjk vij vk;qä] pacy laÒkx] eqjSuk d¢ le{k f}rh; vihy çLrqr dh xÃ( ftlls vij vk;qä }kjk fnukad 20-10-1989 d¢ vkns'k ikfjr dj jktLo fujh{kd rFkk vuqfoÒkxh; vfèkdkjh] fÒ.M }kjk ikfjr vkns'k¨a d¨ fujLr djrs gq, çdj.k fopkj.k U;k;ky; d¨ çR;kofrZr fd;k x;kA vij vk;qä d¢ vkns'k d¢ fo#) vkosndx.k }kjk jktLo e.My d¢ le{k fuxjkuh çLrqr dh xÃA jktLo e.My }kjk fnukad 3-9-1990 d¨ vkns'k ikfjr dj fuxjkuh fujLr djrs gq, vij vk;qä] pacy laÒkx] eqjSuk }kjk ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 20-10-1989 fLFkj j[kk x;kA vij vk;qä d¢ vkns'k d¢ vuqØe esa fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk çdj.k esa iqu% mÒ;i{k¨a d¨ lquk x;k rFkk çLrqr vfHkys[k¨a dk ifj'khyu djrs gq, ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 20-7-1995 }kjk fookfnr Òwfe ij okfjlku d¢ vkèkkj ij ckcwflag iq= cyflag ,oa efgyk N¨Vh fcfV;k mQZ fcVuh iq=h cyflag d¢ uke ukekarj.k Lohdkj fd;k x;kA fopkj.k U;k;ky; d¢ vkns'k d¢ fo#) vkosndx.k }kjk vuqfoÒkxh; vfèkdkjh] fÒ.M d¢ le{k vihy çLrqr dh xÃA vuqfoÒkxh; vfèkdkjh d¢ vkns'k fnukad 31-8-1998 }kjk vihy vLohdkj djrs gq,] fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 20-7-1995 fLFkj j[kk x;kA vuqfoÒkxh; vfèkdkjh d¢ vkns'k d¢ fo#) vkosndx.k }kjk vij vk;qä] pacy laÒkx] eqjSuk d¢ le{k f}rh; vihy çLrqr dh xÃA vij vk;qä }kjk fnukad 31-1-2002 d¨ vkns'k ikfjr dj vihy vLohdkj dh xà rFkk vèkhuLFk n¨u¨a U;k;ky;¨a }kjk ikfjr vkns'k¨a d¨ fLFkj j[kk x;kA vij vk;qä }kjk ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 31-1-2002 d¢ fo#) vkosndx.k }kjk ;g fuxjkuh bl U;k;ky; d¢ le{k çLrqr dh xà gSA 3- vkosnd vfÒÒk"kd }kjk eq[; :i ls fyf[kr rdZ çLrqr fd, x, gSa fd e`rd ÒwfeLokeh Jh cyflag }kjk vkosnd d¢ i{k esa olh;r lEikfnr dh xà Fkh] ftld¢ vkèkkj ij mud¢ }kjk ukekarj.k pkgk x;k gSA iwoZ esa jktLo fujh{kd }kjk vkosnd d¢ i{k esa ukekarj.k vkns'k fn;k x;k Fkk] ftls vuqfoÒkxh; vfèkdkjh] fÒ.M }kjk fLFkj j[kk x;k FkkA mud¢ }kjk eq[; :i ls ;g vuqj¨èk fd;k x;k gS fd fuxjkuh Lohdkj fd;k tk, A vèkhuLFk rhu¨a U;k;ky;¨a }kjk ikfjr vkns'k¨a d¨ vikLr dj Lo- Jh cyflag d¢ LFkku ij olh;rukes d¢ vkèkkj ij vkosndx.k d¢ uke ukekarj.k fd, tkus dk vkns'k ikfjr fd;k tk,A 4- vukosnd vfèkoäk dk eq[; :i ls ;g rdZ gS fd olh;r d¢ vkèkkj ij LoRo vftZr djus d¢ lEcUèk esa O;ogkj U;k;ky; }kjk fu.kZ; fy;k tkuk pkfg,] u fd jktLo U;k;ky; }kjkA mudk ;g Òh rdZ gS fd vèkhuLFk rhu¨a U;k;ky;¨a }kjk olh;r dk leFkZu ugÈ fd;k gSA blfy, mud¢ }kjk eq[; :i ls ;g vuqj¨èk fd;k x;k gS fd vèkhuLFk rhu¨a U;k;ky;¨a }kjk ikfjr vkns'k oSèkkfud g¨dj fLFkj j[ks tk,a o fuxjkuh fujLr dh tk,A 5- çdj.k dk voy¨du fd;k x;kA mÒ;i{k vfèkoäkx.k d¢ rd¨Za ij euu fd;k x;kA 6- çdj.k d¢ voy¨du ls Li"V gS fd vkosnd d¢ i{k esa çLrqr olh;r fookfnr gSA tgk¡ olh;r dh oSèkrk fookfnr gS] ogk¡ olh;r d¢ vkèkkj ij LoRo vftZr djus d¢ lEcUèk esa O;ogkj U;k;ky; }kjk fu.kZ; fy;k tkuk pkfg,] u fd jktLo U;k;ky; }kjkA bl lEcUèk esa ekuuh; eè;çns'k mPp U;k;ky; }kjk 2021 ¼1½ vkj,u 221 % ,eih 2692@2020 jathr mQZ ÒÃ;q e¨fgrs fo#) Jherh uafnrk flag ,oa vU; }kjk fuEukuqlkj fuèkkZfjr fd;k x;k gS %& ''(13) Section 110 of MPLRC Code reads as under :-- ''110. Mutation of acquisition of right in land records. -- (1) The Patwari or Nagar Servekshak or person authorised under section 109 shall enter into a register prescribed for the purpose every acquisition of right reported to him under section 109 or which comes to his notice from any other source. (2) The Patwari or Nagar Servekshak or person authorised, as the case may be, shall intimate to the Tahsildar, all reports regarding acquisition of right received by him under sub-section (1) in such manner and in such Form as may be prescribed, within thirty days of the receipt thereof by him. (3) On receipt of intimation under section 109 or on receipt of intimation of such acquisition of right from any other source, the Tahsildar shall within fifteen days,- (a) register the case in his Court; (b) issue a notice to all persons interested and to such other persons and authorities as may be prescribed, in such Form and manner as may be prescribed; and (c) Display a notice relating to the proposed mutation on the notice board of his office, and publish it in the concerned village or sector in such manner as may be prescribed; (4) The Tahsildar shall, after a affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the persons interested and after making such further enquiry as he may deem necessary, pass orders relating to mutation within thirty days of registration of case, in case of undisputed matter, and within five months, in case of disputed matter, and make necessary entry in the village khasra or sector khasra, as the case may be, and in other land records. (5) The Tahsildar shall supply a certified copy of the order passed under sub-section (4) and updated land records free of cost to the parties within thirty days, in the manner prescribed and only thereafter close the case : Provided that if the required copies are not supplied within the period specified, the Tahsildar shall record the reasons and report to the Sub-Divisional Officer. (6) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 35, no case under this section shall be dismissed due to the absence of a party and shall be disposed of on merits. (7) All proceedings under this section shall be completed within two months in respect of undisputed case and within six months in respect of disputed case from the date or registration of the case. (7) All proceedings under this section shall be completed within two months in respect of undisputed case and within six months in respect of disputed case from the date or registration of the case. In case the proceedings are not disposed of within the specified period, the Tahsildar shall report the information of pending cases to the Collector in such Form and manner as may be prescribed.]'' (14) ''Acquisition of right'' is a crucial aspect which has to be kept in mind while deciding the application under section 110 of MPLR Code. (15) The moot question for consideration is that whether the revenue authorities are competent to go the extent of deciding the disputed question of title by adjudicating the correctness and genuineness of ''Will'' or not? (16) It is submitted by the Counsel for the respondent No. 1 that the right can also be acquired by virtue of a ''Will''. Therefore, once the Tahsildar has a jurisdiction to decide the application under section 110 of MPLRC Code on the basis of acquisition of right of the parties, then the Tahsildar has a jurisdiction to decide the correctness and genuineness of ''Will'' also. (17) Per contra, it is submitted by the Counsel for the State that it is wellestablished principle of law that the burden to prove the ''Will'' is on the propounder nd he has to remove all suspicious circumstances which are attached to a ''Will'' and since the ''Will'' is a departure from the general law of succession, therefore, it necessarily involves the question of title, which cannot be adjudicated by the revenue authorities. (18) Considered the submissions made by the Counsel for the parties. (19) Section 31 of MPLR Code reads as under:- ''31. Conferral of Status of Courts on Board and ''Revenue Officers. - The Board or a Revenue Officer, while exercising power under this Code or any other enactment for the time being in force to enquire into or to decide any question arising for determination between the State Government and any person or between parties to any proceedings, shall be a Revenue Court.'' (20) Thus, From the plain reading of the aforesaid section, it is clear that the revenue authorities shall be treated as revenue court for the purposes of ''any proceedings between the parties''. The important question which involves in the interpretation of section 31 of MPLR Code is as to whether the words ''any proceedings''. would include a question of title also or the proceedings are confined to the proceedings under the MPLR Code only. (21) If an application under Section 110 of MPLR Code is filed for mutation of the name of all the legal heirs, then it would certainly be a proceeding under the MPLR Code because the question of title is not involved and all the legal heirs of the deceased/owner will be brought on record without any further adjudication but whether the adjudication of the title of the parties on the basis of a ''Will'' can be said to be a proceeding under the Act or not, is a moot question which requires consideration. (22) Section 178 of MPLR Code reads as under :- ''178. Partition of holding.-- (1) If in any holding, which has been assessed for purpose of agriculture under section 59, there are more than one Bhumiswami any such Bhumiswami may apply to a Tahsildar for a partition of his share in the holding : [Provided that if any question of title is raised the Tahsildar shall stay the proceeding before him for a period of three months to facilitate the institution of a civil suit for determination of the question of title.] [(1-A) If a civil suit is filed within the period specified in the proviso to sub-section (1), and stay order is obtained from the Civil Court, the Tahsildar shall stay his proceedings pending the decision of the civil court. If no civil suit is filed within the said period, he shall vacate the stay order and proceed to partition the holding in accordance with the entries in the record of rights.] (2) The Tahsildar, may, after hearing the co-tenure holders, divide the holding and apportion the assessment of the holding in accordance with the rules made under this Code. [(3) x x x] [(4) x x x] [(5) x x x] Explanation I - For purposes of this section any co-sharer of the holding of a Bhumiswami who has obtained a declaration of his title in such holding from a competent civil court shall be deemed to be a co-tenure holder of such holding. [(3) x x x] [(4) x x x] [(5) x x x] Explanation I - For purposes of this section any co-sharer of the holding of a Bhumiswami who has obtained a declaration of his title in such holding from a competent civil court shall be deemed to be a co-tenure holder of such holding. Explanation II - [x x x]'' (23) Proviso to section 178 (1) of MPLR Code specifically provides that in a partition proceedings, if any question of title is raised by any of the parties, then the revenue authorities shall stay the proceedings for a period of three months in order to facilitate the parties for institution of a civil suit for determination of question of title. Provision to section 178(1) of MPLR Code makes it clear as noon day that question fo determination of title is beyond jurisdiction of the revenue authorities, otherwise the Tahsildar was not required to stay the proceedings so that the party to the partition proceedings may institute a civil suit for determination of question of title. If the words ''any proceedings'' are read in the light of the proviso to section 178 (1) of MPLR Code, then it is clear that ''any proceedings'' would not include any proceeding involving the question of title of the parties. Whenever the question of title is raised or is involved, then the matter has to be adjudicated by the Civil Court and not by the revenue authorities.'' (Emphasis added) blh çdkj] e-ç- mPp U;k;ky; }kjk fjV ;kfpdk Øekad 1996@2020 egkjkt flag ,oa vU; fo#) jke çlkn ,oa vU; esa vkns'k fnukad 7-7-2020 esa ;g vfÒfuèkkZfjr fd;k x;k gS %& ''Thus, it is well-established principle of law that the revenue authorities have no jurisdiction to decide the genuineness of the ''Will'' and it is only for the Civil Court to decide that whether the ''Will'' was executed or not? Whenever a person claims his right in a property on the basis of a ''Will'', then the Revenue Authorities are not competent to decide the genuiness of a ''Will'' and the person claiming the benefit of the ''Will'' must necessarily establish his title by filing a properly constituted civil suit before a competent Court of Civil jurisdiction. Whenever a person claims his right in a property on the basis of a ''Will'', then the Revenue Authorities are not competent to decide the genuiness of a ''Will'' and the person claiming the benefit of the ''Will'' must necessarily establish his title by filing a properly constituted civil suit before a competent Court of Civil jurisdiction. In view of the controversy involved in the present case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioners have an efficacious remedy of establishing their title by filing a civil suit before a Court of competent jurisdiction. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Additional Commissioner, Gwalior as well as the SDO (Revenue), Ishagarh, District Ashok Nagar did not commit any mistake in setting aside the order passed by the Tahsildar. However, since the petitioners are claiming their title on the basis of ''Will''. therefore, a liberty is granted to them that in case, if they so desire, then they can file a properly constituted civil suit for declaration of their right and title on the basis of ''Will''.'' (Emphasis added) blh çdkj] 2021 ¼1½ vkj,u 25 èkeZohj flag fo#) #Lre flag ¼fofoèk ;kfpdk Øekad 3281@2019½ esa ekuuh; e-ç- mPp U;k;ky; d¢ vkns'k fnukad 27-8-2019 esa fuEufyf[kr U;kf;d m)j.k çfrikfnr fd;k x;k gS %& ''Thus, it is held that the Revenue Courts have no jurisdiction to decide the rights of any party on the basis of ''Will'' and if somebody wants to claim his/her title over any property, then he/she has to seek declaration from the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction... The application filed by the respondents under section 109 and 110 of MP Land Revenue Code is hereby rejected. The respondents are granted liberty that if they so desire, then they can seek declaration from the Civil Court of Competent jurisdiction.'' (Emphasis added) ekuuh; e-ç- mPp U;k;ky; dh [k.MihB }kjk eqjkjh o vU; fo#) e-ç- 'kklu ,oa vU; 2020¼4½ ,e-ih-,y-ts- 139 esa fuEukuqlkj fuèkkZfjr fd;k x;k gS %& ''6. The controversy involved in the present matter relates to title based on will, which is purely subject matter of Civil Court and can only be decided by the Civil Court, with the help of evidence adduced before it, by examining the attesting witnesses. The controversy involved in the present matter relates to title based on will, which is purely subject matter of Civil Court and can only be decided by the Civil Court, with the help of evidence adduced before it, by examining the attesting witnesses. It is also held in Rajinder Singh and Another v. Financial Commissioner (decided by punjab & Haryana Hich Court in Writ Petition No. 3821/2011) that validity of will can be decided by the Civil Court, which is the exclusive domain of Civil Court and this cannot be decided by the Revenue Courts.'' (Emphasis added) vÒh gky esa gh fnukad 6-9-2021 d¨] ekuuh; lo¨ZPp U;k;ky; }kjk thrsUæ flag fo#) eè;çns'k jkT; ,oa vU;] ¼Lis'ky yho fiVh'ku 13146@2021½ esa fuEu U;kf;d fl)kar çfrikfnr fd;k x;k gS %& ''As per the settled proposition of law, if there is any dispute with respect to the title and more particularly when the mutation entry is sought to be made on the basis of the will, the party who is claiming title/right on the basis of the will has to approach the appropriate civil court/court and get his rights crystalised and only thereafter on the basis of the decision before the civil court necessary mitation entry can be made. ... In view of the above settled proposition of law laid down by this Court, it cannot be said that the High Court has committed any error in setting aside the order passed by the revenue authorities directing to mutate the name of the petitioner herein in the revenue records on the bais of the alleged will dated 20.5.1998 and relegating the petitioner to approach the appropriate court to crystalise his rights on the basis of the alleged will dated 20.5.1998. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the High Court.'' (Emphasis added) Li"V gS fd ekuuh; lo¨ZPp U;k;ky; ,oa ekuuh; e-ç- mPp U;k;ky; }kjk] olh;r fookfnr g¨us dh fLFkfr esa] olh;r d¢ vkèkkj ij LoRo dk nkok fl) djus d¢ fy, O;ogkj U;k;ky; ls mn~Ĩ"k.kk djkus d¢ fu"d"kZ fudkys x, gSaA 7- ;g egRoiw.kZ eqík gS fd olh;r ;k fdlh vU; eqís ij flfoy U;k;ky; }kjk vfèkdkj¨a dk fofu'p; g¨us rd D;k jktLo U;k;ky;¨a d¨ ukekarj.k dh dk;Zokgh djuh pkfg, v©j og dk;Zokgh fdl Lo:i dh g¨uh pkfg,A çdj.k lqgkxoarh fo#) dfe'uj] ifV;kyk ¼lhihMCY;w Ø- 14419@2011½ esa ekuuh; iatkc o gfj;k.kk mPp U;k;ky; dh [k.MihB d¢ le{k Bhd ;gh eqík reference fd;k Fkk %& ''Whether revenue authorities are competent to carry out correction in the khasra girdawari in favour of one of the litigants, who is party in a pending civil suit involving question of title and possession, during the pendency of civil suit?'' mä eqís dk fujkdj.k ekuuh; iatkc o gfj;k.kk mPp U;k;ky; dh [k.MihB }kjk fuEukuqlkj fd;k x;k gS %& ''As we have already noticed, the object of harvest inspection/girdawari is to collect accurate information regarding crops, change in rights, rent and possession of land, amendments required in the village map, the date with regard to crops for the purposes of overall planning. One must understand that basis or nature of a revenue entry, namely, it neither confers nor divest a party of its title whether proprietary or possessory and is a mere fiscal entry recorded to update the revenue record. It, therefore, cannot be held that a khasra girdawari cannot be recorded or corrected during pendency of a suit. One must understand that basis or nature of a revenue entry, namely, it neither confers nor divest a party of its title whether proprietary or possessory and is a mere fiscal entry recorded to update the revenue record. It, therefore, cannot be held that a khasra girdawari cannot be recorded or corrected during pendency of a suit. Thus, the question posed is hereby answered by holding CWP No. 14419 of 2021 that a revenue authority has jurisdiction to conduct spot inspection with regard to change of entries in the khasra girdwari even if a suit involving a question of title and/or possession is pending, but such an entry is not binding upon a Civil Court and any change of possession has to be proved by independent material that may be placed before the Court.'' (Emphasis added) voy¨duh; gS fd ekuuh; e-ç- mPp U;k;ky; }kjk tkjh egkjkt flag ,oa vU; fo#) jkeçlkn ,oa vU; v©j èkeZohj flag fo#) #Lre flag d¢ vkns'k] ftud¢ U;k;n`"Vkar Åij iSjk 6 esa mYysf[kr gS] ekuuh; iatkc o gfj;k.kk mPp U;k;ky; d¢ [k.MihB d¢ blh vkns'k ij vkèkkfjr gSaA ekuuh; [k.MihB }kjk mäkuqlkj ;g fuèkkZfjr fd;k x;k gS fd flfoy U;k;ky; esa dk;Zokgh çpfyr jgus d¢ n©jku jktLo vfÒys[k¨a d¨ fLFkj vFkok frozen in time ugÈ j[kk tk ldrkA muesa ;Fkk vko';d la'k¨èku o baækt fd, tk ldrs gSa( blesa ukekarj.k Òh 'kkfey gSA mä lÒh la'k¨èku vFkok baækt fofèkd fl)kar¨a dk ikyu djrs gq, fofèkd çfØ;k ls fu;ekuqlkj fd, tkus g¨axsA mä baækt] ftlesa ukekarj.k Òh 'kkfey gS] ls lEcfUèkr d¨ LoRo d¢ vfèkdkj ugÈ feysaxs] u gh blls d¨Ã LoRo ls oafpr g¨xkA LoRo d¢ vfèkdkj¨a dk fofu'p;] fookn dh fLFkfr esa] flfoy U;k;ky; ls gh g¨xk v©j jktLo vfÒys[k¨a esa rnuqlkj baækt fd;k tk,xkA mäkuqlkj] jktLo U;k;ky;¨a d¢ vkns'k d¢ vkèkkj ij jktLo vfÒys[k¨a esa baækt] flfoy U;k;ky; }kjk vkns'k fn, tkus rd gh jgsxkA 8- Åij iSjk 7 vuqlkj mä ukekarj.k dh dk;Zokgh Åij iSjk 6 vuqlkj olh;r d¢ vkèkkj ij ugÈ dh tk,xhA vr% ukekarj.k dh dk;Zokgh LokÒkfod mÙkjkfèkdkfj;¨a d¢ i{k esa dh tk,xh] tSlk fd ekuuh; eè;çns'k mPp U;k;ky; }kjk 2021¼1½ vkj,u 221 ,eih 2692@2020 jathr mQZ ÒÃ;q e¨fgrs fo#) Jherh uafnrk flag ,oa vU; esa fuEukuqlkj fuèkkZfjr fd;k x;k gS %& ''(33) The Tahsildar is directed to delete the name of respondent No. 1 from the revenue record with immediate effect. The Tahsildar, Tahsil Gwalior is directed to mutate the name of the legal heirs of Late Vijay Singh Rao Mohite as per Hindu Succession Act. If the legal heirs are not available, then the Tahsildar, Tahsil Gwalior is directed to record the name of the State Government. (34) The mutation either in the name of legal heir or in the name of State Government shall be subject to the outcome of the civil suit, which is pending between the parties. It is further directed that in case, if the names of the legal heirs of Late Vijay Singh Rao Mohite or the State Government are mutated, then neither the legal heirs nor the State Government would create any third party right in the property and status que shall be maintained till the final adjudication by the civil Court.'' blh çdkj d¢ fu"d"kZ iatkc o gfj;k.kk mPp U;k;ky; }kjk jktsUæ flag o vU; fo#) Qkbusal dfe'uj ¼flfoy ;kfpdk Øekad 3821@2011½ d¢ vkns'k fnukad 21 ekpZ 2013 esa fudkys x, gSa %& ''.... it is unhesitatingly held that the respondent revenue authorities have rightly sanctioned the mutation on the basis of natural succession, ignoring the will, validity whereof is pending consideration before the learned civil court.'' (Emphasis added) Li"V gS fd fopkj.k U;k;ky;] vuqfoÒkxh; vfèkdkjh ,oa vij vk;qä }kjk okfjlku gd esa ukekarj.k d¢ vkns'k nsus esa fofèkd :i ls mfpr dk;Zokgh dh xà gSA 9- mij¨ä foospuk d¢ vkèkkj ij fuxjkuh fujLr dh tkdj vèkhuLFk U;k;ky; vij vk;qä] pacy laÒkx] eqjSuk }kjk ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 31-1-2002] vuqfoÒkxh; vfèkdkjh] fÒ.M }kjk ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 31-8-1998 rFkk rglhynkj] fÒ.M }kjk ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 20-7-1995 oSèkkfud g¨dj fLFkj j[ks tkrs gSaA 10- olh;r d¢ vkèkkj ij ukekarj.k gsrq vkosndx.k l{ke U;k;ky; esa okn çLrqr djus gsrq Lora= gSaA ;g Òh vknsf'kr fd;k tkrk gS fd ukekarj.k fd, tkus d¢ 4 ekg rd ç'ukèkhu Òwfe d¢ gLrkarj.k ij j¨d jgsxh] ftlls vkosndx.k mä vofèk esa O;ogkj U;k;ky; esa viuk vfèkdkj LFkkfir djus d¢ fy, eqdnek nk;j dj ld¢ v©j O;ogkj U;k;ky; }kjk Òwfe d¢ gLrkarj.k d¢ lacaèk esa ;Fk¨fpr varfje vkns'k fn, tk ld¢aA