Law:

Section:

P L D 1957 W. P. (Rev.) 15         Mutation-----   ----Widow alienating property-Reversioners obtain ing declaratory decree from Civil Court that alienation by widow would not affect rights of reversioners after death of widow No suit for possession filed within time after death of widow -Mutation cannot be refused in favour of persons entitled to be recorded as owners in place of widow in revenue papers Whether such persons are in possession or not is no concern of Revenue Officer.     ORDER   H. A. MAJID.-------The dispute relates to mutation No. 382 of the estate of Mamdana in Tahsil Phalia. The land, to which that mutation relates, had been held by a widow who sold it to the present respondent. Some of the reversioners obtained a declaratory decree in 1943 to the effect that the alienation in favour of the present respondent would not affect their reversionary rights after the death of the vendor (the widow). The death of the vendor took place in 1945. The mutation in question was recorded in 1954.   The purpose of the mutation entry was that the reversioners of the widow should be shown as the owners of the property in question. The Assistant Collector rejected the mutation. The Collector, however, intervened in appeal and directed that the mutation should be accepted in respect of such fields as were in the possession of the present petitioners in the Khasra Girdawari of 1954 and that it should stand rejected in respect of the other fields. The Commis sioner, who was moved by the present respondent decided that the whole mutation should be rejected.   The reason why the Commissioner dismissed the mutation was that the declaratory decree was not followed by a suit for obtaining possession within the period of three years after the death of the widow as required by law. To my mind, this is an extraneous consideration. The mutation in dispute is merely to record the fact that certain persons became owners instead of the present respondent as soon as the widow died. The mutation will not show…