• Case of land dispute

Breif summary of case:
Mr  Naveen : Grand grand father 
Mr:  Mohan ,- Grand father 
(1)In 1944 my grand grandfather Mr. Naveen kumar purchased land of 20 decimal, plot no. 291/1 & 292/1  from Ramakant Raja (King)  of Ramharg estate  through Patta (sale deed).
 Mr. Nitin  purchased a land of 16 decimal , plot no. 291/2 & 292/2 from Dadan pandey in 1967 adjacent to Naven kumar land .   In the sale deed of Mr Nitin ,  the eastern boundary is mentioned as Mr. Naveen (my grand grand father ) land , southern boundary as District board road, western boundary as Satyanarayan  lal land  and northern land as his own land (purchased in 1965 , mention in Sl No: 3 below)
In the southern side of both the above land , District board Road is existing .
(2)In 1965 , my grand father  Mr. Mohan  purchased a land of 18 decimal , plot no : 273 (part)  vide registered deed No:  17818 dt: 03.08.1965 with specific boundary  from  Mr  Ashok  kumar,  just at the northern side of Naveen kumar land .In the sale deed ,the southern side land is shown to be land of Mr Naveen   (my grand grand father) .The western side land is shown to be land of Mr Nitin  (plot no: 273, part ) .Northern boundary as railway hata .
(3)Mr Nitin purchased the plot no: 273 (part) , area =12 decimal on same day in 1965 from Mr Ashok kumar   vide registered deed No:  17819 dt: 03.08.1965 with specific boundaries just at the northern side of his own land (Plot No. 291/2 & 292/2) . In this sale deed the eastern boundary is shown to be of Mr. Ashok land, western boundary as Ramnath  . The southern side is shown to be his own land i.e  Mr Nitin house  (As Mr Nitin was residing on rent at this land/ house since 1960, which he purchased this land in 1967 as mentioned in point No: 1 above ) . 
(4)In 1967 , Mr Nitin  purchased a land  from Mr Ashok  , plot no: 273(part) area=16 decimal  in his wife name Rekha Devi   , in which the eastern boundary is shown to be land of my grand father   ( Mr mohan land).
(5)In 1973 Mr Nitin sells his land plot no: 273 (mentioned in sl no: 3), area =12 decimal  to Mr Binay Kumar with specific boundaries .During sell he chaged the plot no from 273 to 274 & 286. In this sale deed also , Eastern boundary is shown to be land of Mr Mohan( My grand father land) , southern boundary as Nitin house, northern boundary as railway hata  , western boundary as Ramnath.i.e he changed the plot no but boundary remains same .
(6)	In 1974 Mr Nitin sells his land, plot no: 291/2 & 292/2 to Mr Binay kumar , area =16 decimal  mentioning that this land was purchased by him from Mr Dadan pandey 

(7)	In 1972, a Chakbandi survey was carried out by state Govt , wherin they provided a new plot nos to the old plots or part of plot, as below , as per form 17 record . (All form 17 record is available with me which I obtained from record room )

(a)	Old plot no: 291/2 & 292/2 correspond to new plot no: 773 of 21 decimal in the name of Mr Nitin , which was later rectified by Mr Binay kumar in his own name through Chakbandi officer , as he had purchased this land in 1974, area 16 decimal ( Mentioned in sl no:6)

(b)	Old plot no: 274 part, correspond to new plot no: 774 of 12 decimal in the name of Binay kumar 
(c)	Old plot no: 275 correspond to new plot no: 776 of 03 decimal in the name of Binay kumar 
(d)	Old plot no: 274 part  correspond to new plot no: 778 of 02 decimal in the name of Binay kumar
(e)	Old plot no: 274 part  correspond to new plot no: 779 of 08 decimal in the name of Binay kumar
(f)	Old plot no: 274 part  correspond to new plot no: 780 of 10 decimal in the name of Binay kumar
     (Note: -
1) Chakbandi survey map is not available in Circle office of this area.	
2)The total land in chakbandi survey is coming to be 56 decimal in the name of Binay kumar, where as total land purchased by Binay so far is 28 (16+12) decimal only . And  the total land in the name of Mr Nitin kumar and his wife is = 16+12+16= 44 decimal.
3)The land of rekha devi is not sold as I have searched this record in record room from 1950 to 1980.
In between 2001 to 2010,  the chakbandi survey land of 56 decimal is sold by Mr Pradeep (Son of Binay kumar) to one tenant  Raju residing in plot no. 291/2 & 292/2 as a tenant .(other three tenant is also residing in plot no: 291/2 & 292/2) . All these tenant purchased the land of 12 decimal  through four sale deed in plot No: 291/2 & 292/2 , where in they have mentioned their  plot no as  774 in stead of 773 .
Also Mr Pradeep solds 36 decimal of land to Mr Raju & his brother  in two more sale deed. One sale deed is sold through plot no: 773 , area =13 decimal , wherein it has been mentioned that eastern boundary is of my grand father name (Mr Mohan) (Which is wrong in my opinion as this land is falling in plot no: 291/2 & 292/2, in which eastern boundary is Mr naveen ( My grand grnad father) and in another sale deed Mr pradeep sold his land to raju brothers of 23 decimal, where in they have mentioned , northen boundary as railway hata and westyern boundary as Ramnath , eastern boundary as Nij .

One day , one of my relatives  gives the registered deed of plot no: 273 ( purchased by grand father  Mr Mohan ,registered deed No:  17818 dt: 03.08.1965) to  Raju.

Suddenly we receive a notice from circle officer for measurement of land . The land is measured by Amin  . Since chakbandi survey map is not available  , Amin  used old map and form 17  (Form 17 tells how the plot is carved  from old plots  and there is no mention of boundary in Form 17 ) for measurement of land . 

The  Circle officer gives a   report  on the basis of Amin   measurement  and document submitted by us and Raju ( We submitted our registered deed of 273 along with sale deed of plot no: 274 & 286 where in eastern boundary is shown to be of my grand father) . Mr Nitin kumar  . He declares  that this land is not ours . It is the land of Mr Raju . He also mentions that we have encroached  18 decimal of land by constructing a pakka house in 7 decimal and 11 decimal land has been encroached by boundary . (In this land we along with family is living in pakka housed along with boundary of 11 decimal since land procurement date ).

He also declares that this land of 18 decimal  belongs to Raju and we are in unauthorized  encroachment ( 11 decimal in 773 and 7 decimal in plot no: 776,778 and 779)  .  He also mentions that our land 273  is  far apart as per old map .
 Here it is essential to  note that Amin has mention in his report to circle officer that , new chakbandi survey map is not available for new plots so Forms 17 & old map has been used for measurement of land .
Also he mentined in his report that Old plot no: 291/2 & 292/2,274 &  286  correspond to new plot no: 773 of 21 decimal, though fact is that Chakbandi plot no: 773 is made from old plot no 291/2 & 292/2 only as  per form 17 record. Here Amin is at mistaken as he changes the Form 17 record  . He added the plot no: 274 & 286 in from 17 of plot no: 773 to measure the land of Raju  plot no: 773 in our side . Had he not added ,  then this new chakbandi  plot no: 773 would  fall in plot no: 291/2 & 292/2  .There is no question of falling plot no 773 in our plot no: 273 . Here Amin has done fraud in my view as he has changed the Form 17 i.e Govt record .  Amin also mentioned in his report about all new plot made from old plot as explained  from (b) to (f) above. In sl No: a he has changed the record as mentioned in above para.
After the order of circle officer we came to know by our lawyer that  our plot no: 273 is wrong plot but since Boundary will prevail over plot no, our lawyer advices for rectification of deed and accordingly case was filed for suit for declaration .
To  get all  the record or form 17  of new Chabandi plot no 773 ,774,776,778,779 & 780 (how these plot correspond to old plots)  mentioned in the CO report   , I  sent a RTI  to circle office under RTI-2005  , but circle officer has not provided  me this information rather he provides incomplete  information , which is not fulfilling my requirement. 
 Then I went for appeal to additional collector , he called me & CO office in June last week , but I could not attend his office due to urgent job at my duty place. Then  in his reply Additional collector send the same answer/ reply  as Circle office representative submitted the  same record to Additional collector office in the last week of June .
In july  I visited Additional collector offices , he assured me to made it available in 10 days but it is verbal assurance. I also met to circle officer he told me that these records are not available but I have spoken him to made it available . He was telling that I will write that it is not available , however after discussion he assured that he will try to find out the records .      ( here  circle officer is new one  , earlier one is transferred to other places) 

In view of above my question is as beow:

a)	Since form -17 record has been changed by Amin , due to thart Mr raju is claiming  land of 13 decimal in plot no: 273 and the same has been veited by Circle officer  .Why action  can not be taken  or case may be filed  directly against Amin (Amin is on  contractual basis to circle office)  and circle office for tampering in form -17 (Govt record) . As earlier it has been adviced by your forum that circle officers has done it on his official capacity so case can not be files. But here it is a deliberate  mistake .
                Please advice along with alternate option  .
b)	I am planning to  go for second appeal to State information commissioner  . Please advice on this issue, if any thing to be mentioned  specifically .
c)	Also please advice further course of action  , if I don’t get complete  information or documents from CO offcie and additional collector office  .

Asked 2 years ago in Property Law from Case of land dispute, Uttar Pradesh
Religion: Hindu
1)if  you are aggrieved by the measurement done by MR Amin in carrying out proper measurements you have remedy of going in appeal against wrong measurements done . filing of any criminal complaint against MR Amin acting in his official capacity wont serve the purpose . 

2) in your appeal to SIC seek complete records of form 17 of new chabandi plots which has not been furnished 

3) you have already engaged a local lawyer who has gone through the various documents cited by you in your query . go by his advice . 
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
33605 Answers
1854 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

1) In the second  appeal  you need to mention  is that the information requested was not provided was insufficient and you need mention that the information is crucial on establishing he correct demarcation.

2) In the meantime pursue your ways of obtaining whatever information the officers are agreeing to help with.

3) In terms of further course of action you can move the civil court with a declaratory suit and request the appointment of a court commissioner to submit it's report and desk directions from the court for a final resolution.
S J Mathew
Advocate, Mumbai
2079 Answers
87 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

From your contents it can be understood that the Ameen or the local government survey officer has not surveyed he landed properties properly with the help of old and new revenue records. 
There appears some gross violation of rules to favor someone with vested interest has taken place hence your pleas have not been considered properly. Also mistake lies on your side for having not attended the session before the Additional collector when yo had preferred the appeal, atleast you could have informed and requested for an adjournment with the authority for a hearing on some other day through some representative which you have not done, thus the situation went against you.
From the events you appear to be aggrieved a lot due to lethargic and partiality shown by the authorities to the side (opposite side), if you dont get justice, you may approach civil court with a suit for declaration of check boundaries pertaining to your properties seeking remeasurement of the same through Court appointed advocate commissioner with the help of government surveyor and village administrative officer along with the  revenue records. 
This can fetch you the desired relief. 
T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
23650 Answers
233 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

1. You cannot file the case against Amin as your legal rights operate against Mr.Raju alone. It is Raju who is claiming legal rights under the form 17 which has been changed by Amin. So it is a private dispute wherein no legal rights are asserted against the public servant who acted in the discharge of his official duties. A mistake is mistake, it cannot be 'deliberate'.

2. However, the order of the amin can be challenged in the court, which can quash it as illegal. 

3. A second appeal can be filed on merits. There is nothing more we can say.

4. If you do not get the required documents/information even after moving the SIC then you may move the High Court.
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
20727 Answers
548 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

1.File a declaratory suit praying for declaration that the Amin has made gross mistake in conducting the survey of the land as mentioned by you,

2. Once the declaration is obtained from the Court, you can lodge a criminal case against the Amin for willfully making the said mistake for gain from the beneficiaries of his said wrong survey report,

3. You can also file a W.P.against inaction of the Collector and the Circle officer to rectify the mistake made by he Amin as pointed out by you.
Krishna Kishore Ganguly
Advocate, Kolkata
14876 Answers
351 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

Ask a Lawyer

Get legal answers from top-rated lawyers in 1 hour. It's quick, easy, and anonymous!
  Ask a Lawyer