Please Log in / Register to access the full text of this judgment and the entire database
(2022) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 17221 = 2022(2) L.A.R. 640
Decided on: 18.11.2022
Present:
Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Constitution of India, Article 226 – Haryana Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 34 -- Ex-parte civil court decree -- On the basis of Civil Court decree, the mutation reversed – Petitioner submitted that he was wrongly proceeded against ex parte, an application for setting aside the ex parte decree has been filed, the revenue authorities should not have reversed the mutation – Held, submission is misconceived, if the ex parte judgment and decree is set aside and an order is passed in favour of the petitioner, the mutation entry will again be reversed -- Revenue authorities cannot sit in judgment over orders passed by the Civil Court -- No interference is called for, writ petition dismissed.
(Para 1-3)
***
SUDHIR MITTAL, J. (ORAL) –
1. The petitioner purchased some land through a registered sale deed dated 07.02.1989 and based on the same Mutation No.334 was entered and sanctioned in his favour. The said sale deed has been set aside by a Civil Court in a suit filed by Jindu Ram and others. On the basis of the Civil Court decree, the mutation in favour of the petitioner has been reversed. Appeal of the petitioner succeeded and the matter was remanded to the Assistant Collector whereafter the Assistant Collector passed the same order as he had done earlier. Subsequent appeal and revisions filed by the petitioner have failed and thus, the present writ petition has been filed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he was wrongly proceeded against ex parte in the civil suit and accordingly, an application for setting aside the ex parte decree has been filed. In this view of the matter, the revenue authorities should not have reversed the mutation.
3. The submission is misconceived. If the ex parte judgment and decree is set aside by the Civil Court and an order is passed in favour of the petitioner, the mutation entry will again be reversed. Revenue authorities cannot sit in judgment over orders passed by the Civil Court and thus, no interference is called for in the impugned orders.
4. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
Petition dismissed.
********