The appellant filed a revision under Section 56.
Therefore, it has remitted the matter to the Assistant Director of Survey Settlement and Land Records for disposal of the matter in accordance with law in the light of the order made by the Deputy Assistant Director of Land Survey Settlement Officer in Annexure A dated August 7, 1989.
The respondents filed the writ petition in the High Court.
The respondents filed a revision under Section 56 to the Director.
In a further revision filed by him the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal by order dated January 1, 1992 dismissed the revision holding that numbersecond revision is maintainable under Section 56.
The facts are number in dispute.
This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court dated April 21, 1994 made in P. No.1628/92.
As stated earlier, the Division Bench has allowed the writ petition with the above direction.
Feeling aggrieved, the respondents filed an appeal under Section 49 of the Act before the Deputy Director Land Records who had allowed the appeal and set aside the order by proceedings dated August 7, 1989 and remitted the matter to the Assistant Director to proceed with demarcation in the light of the directions given in the order.
For the demarcation of boundaries, the appellant had applied to the Assistant Director, Land Records to mutate the lands in her name with the boundaries thereunder.
The Director by his order dated September 16, 1991 dismissed the same.
In furtherance thereof, a further partition had taken place on May 8, 1967 in which the properties have been divided between the appellants husband and the respondents.
The Assistant Director by his proceedings dated October 14, 1986 demarcated the lands.
We have heard the companynsel for the parties.
The Joint Director by his order dated 26, 1991 allowed the revision and set aside the order of the appellate authority and companyfirmed the order of the Assistant Director.
Leave granted.
They are as under In a family partition on February 11, 1953, the properties were divided between two branches.
The High Court in the impugned order has held that since the appeal under Section 50 of the Karnataka land Revenue Act,1956 for short, the Act has number been preferred by the appellant, the revision under Section 56 is number maintainable.
