Sarbeswar Rath and Another vs Consolidation Officer and Others

Order No. 15 dated 24-4-1990-It is not necessary to give the details as to the source of title of the properties inasmuch as in our view the revision filed by Katik Khamari, opp. party No. 4 has not been judiciously determined and the manner in which the Consolidation Commissioner has allowed the revision and vacated the orders of the Court below is not in consonance with sound judicial principles. It is not the law that merely because somebody has obtained a sate deed tie has got title to the property as vendee and his title has to toe declared so long the dead has not been set aside by a competent Court of law. If the deed is void, no steps need be taken to set it aside. The vendor may not have title to convey. In such a case the title deed may be ignored as not worth the paper written on. These aspects have not been unfortunately dealt by the Commissioner who is one of them who ewe not well versed in law but are required to dispose of complicated question? relating to civil Saw and there have been several instances where because of ignorance of law the revisional orders have been set aside.., We quash the order, remit the matter to the Commissioner for disposal of the Revision Case No. 509 of 1983 in accordance with law alter giving, the parties an adequate opportunity of hearing. The parties are directed to appear before the Consolidation Commissioner on 14-5-1990 when a. date of hearing shall be fixed by the Commissioner. With the aforesaid observation, the writ application is disposed of.