Vinod Kumar v. Financial Commissioner Revenue ,Punjab And Others

3.

4.

Feeling aggrieved against the aforesaid partition proceedings and Sanad Takseem, the petitioner preferred a revision petition (ROR No.593 of 2018) before the learned Financial Commissioner (Appeals), Punjab, which was dismissed vide order dated 22.11.2023 (Annexure P-15).

5.

In the aforementioned circumstances, petitioner has filed the present writ petition before this Court, seeking relief(s) as noticed hereinabove.

6.

The sole contention raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was wrongly proceeded against ex parte due to the mention of an incorrect address of Village Amarpura, Tehsil Fazilka, District Abohar, whereas, he is a resident of House No.273, Guru Nanak Nagar, Mandi Dabwali, Sirsa.

7.

I have considered the aforesaid submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, however, I do not find any merit in the same. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not referred to any revenue record pertaining to the land under partition to demonstrate that the petitioner's correct address, as now claimed, was recorded therein. Further, learned counsel has not placed on record any material/document to show that respondent No.3 was aware of the petitioner's correct address and had willfully provided the incorrect address of petitioner.

7.1 It is not disputed before this Court that the petitioner's mother and brother actively participated in the partition proceedings. Despite a proclamation (mustari munadi) being made in the village, the petitioner failed to appear in the partition proceedings. Moreover, even in the present writ petition, the address of petitioner is mentioned as Village Amarpura, Tehsil Fazilka, District Abohar, and not Mandi Dabwali, Sirsa. 8.

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstance, I find no merit in the present writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. 9.

All the pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed.