Allahabad High Court
Mohan And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And 8 Others on 3 January, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 25558 of 2022 Petitioner :- Mohan And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Achchhey Lal Tiwari,Gyanendra Kumar Tripathi,Keshari Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J.
Heard Mr. Achchhey Lal Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners.
The brief facts of the case are that a suit under Section 229B of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act has been filed by Ram Naresh (husband of respondent no.5) as well as Dal Shringar impleading the petitioners as defendants. Madhuri, Vinod & Vikas were also impleaded as defendants nos.5, 6 & 7 in the suit. Plaintiff no.1, Ram Naresh has died accordingly respondent no.5 was substituted as plaintiff no.1/1. Plaintiff no.2, Dal Shringar has also died during pendency of the suit accordingly, respondent nos.5, 6 & 7 filed an application dated 9.10.2017 that they may be transposed as plaintiff nos.3, 4 & 5 due to death of plaintiff no.2, Dal Shringar being his vendees. Petitioners filed their objection to the application dated 9.10.2017. Petitioners have filed abatement application also due to death of plaintiff. Respondent no.3 vide order dated 20.9.2021 allowed the application dated 9.10.2017. Petitioners challenged the order dated 9.10.2017 through revision before Commissioner under Section 333 of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, which has been dismissed by Commissioner vide order dated 21.3.2022, hence this writ petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the suit under Section 229B of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act has been filed by the Ram Naresh Singh and Dal Shringar Singh. He further submitted that during pendency of the suit, Ram Naresh Singh and Dal Shringar Singh have died accordingly, petitioners applied for abatement of the suit. He further submitted that one amendment application has been filed by the contesting respondents stating that Ram Naresh Singh and Dal Shringar Singh have transferred the property in favour of contesting respondents who were impleaded as defendants in the suit so the defendants be transposed as plaintiffs in the aforementioned suit, under Section 229B of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act. He further submitted that the trial Court without considering the averment made in the abatement application filed by the petitioners as well as objection filed to the amendment application has allowed the application filed by the contesting respondents and ordered for transposition of defendants as plaintiffs in the suit. He further submitted that the revision filed against the order of the trial Court has been dismissed on the ground that the order passed is interlocutory in nature. He further submitted that the impugned order be set aside and matter be remanded back for deciding the abatement application filed by the petitioners afresh. He next submitted that the persons who have been transposed as plaintiffs on the basis of sale deed, their sale deed has been challenged in the civil Court and even the mutation order has not been passed on the basis of sale deed alleged to be executed in favour of the contesting respondents. He further submitted that the writ petition be allowed and the impugned order be set aside.
I have considered the argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.
There is no dispute about the fact that the suit under Section 229B of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act has been filed by the husband of respondent no.5 along with respondent no.6 and during pendency of the suit proceeding, the plaintiffs have died and the application filed for transposition by the contesting respondents has been allowed and the objections filed by petitioners have been accordingly disposed of.
At the stage of deciding the substitution application prima facie case has been examined by the courts below and ordered for transposition of impleaded defendants as plaintiffs in the suit being vendees of plaintiffs as such there is no illegality in the impugned order passed for transposition of defendant as plaintiff in the suit.
Since by the impugned order, the question of substitution has been decided and some of the impleaded defendants have been ordered to be transposed as plaintiffs in the suit under Section 229 B of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, as such, no interference is required against the impugned order at this stage.
The suit relates to proceeding under Section 229 B of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, which is a suit of special character, as such, trial Court is directed to decide the suit under Section 229B of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act on merit after framing issue and permitting the parties to lead evidence in accordance with law. The trial Court shall decide the suit expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
With the above observations, the writ petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 3.1.2023 Rameez