Court No. - 50
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 46747 of 2014 Petitioner :- Surya Narayan Tiwari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,D.D. Chauhan,R.P. Srivastava,Shitala Sahai
Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.
List has been revised. No one appears for the petitioner. However, the Court has perused the records.
Through the present writ petition, the petitioner challenges the order passed by the Board of Revenue, U.P. at Allahabad, i.e., respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as, 'Board of Revenue') whereby the claim of respondent Nos. 8 and 9 has been accepted and the claim of the petitioner has been rejected in proceedings registered under Section 229-B of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as, 'Act, 1950').
It appears from the records that one Bageshwari Lal was the original tenure holder of the disputed plots. Respondent Nos. 8 and 9 claimed that Bageshwari Lal had executed a Will dated 26.4.1997 in their favour while the claim of the petitioner was based on alleged Will dated 5.4.1997 executed by Bageshwari Lal in his favour. After considering the evidence on record, the courts below have relied on Will dated 26.4.1997 to accept the claim of respondent Nos. 8 and 9. It also appears from the records that the execution of the Will was proved by its attesting witness. The petitioner did not file original or certified copy of Will dated 5.4.1997 allegedly executed in his favour, but only filed photocopy which was also not proved.
Considering the aforesaid fact, the courts below rejected the Will filed by the petitioner. Even otherwise the Will dated 26.4.1997 was subsequent, and therefore, the alleged Will dated 5.4.1997 was executed in favour of the petitioner stood superseded by Will dated 26.4.1997 executed in favour of respondent Nos. 8 and 9.
The findings recorded by the courts below are findings of fact based on evidence on record and there is no perversity in the aforesaid findings so as to occasion interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The writ petition lacks merit, and is, accordingly
dismissed.
Order Date :- 19.12.2019 Anurag/-