Prabhavatee Devi And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others on 18 September, 2023
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that Tehsildar has exceeded his jurisdiction while deciding the mutation applications filed by petitioners as well as respondent No. 6 by deciding title of the parties as well as genuineness of the will-deed in question as such order dated 19.07.2004 passed by Tehsildar is without jurisdiction. He further submitted that will-deed dated 05.01.2001 was the last registered will-deed executed in favour of all the six daughters by which the earlier registered will- deed dated 25.09.1999 was cancelled as such Tehsildar cannot ignore the last will-deed dated 05.01.2001. He further submitted that order of Tehsildar has been arbitrarily maintained in appeal & revision without considering the case setup by the petitioners in appeal and revision. He submitted that respondent No. 6 has already filed a civil-suit for cancellation of will-deed dated 05.01.2001 which is pending before Civil Court as such petitioners are entitled to be recorded on the basis of will-deed dated 05.01.2001. He further placed the judgment of this Court reported in (2023) 158 R.D. 11 Man Singh vs. Board of Revenue and others in order to demonstrate that if the order passed in the mutation proceeding is without jurisdiction then the same can be interfered with in the exercise of writ petition.