nanak chand disappeared sometime in december 1954 and a report about his disappearance was lodged by the appellants brother dewan chand arrayed in this appeal as respondent number 2 on 25th december 1954 with the local police malhout district ferozepur punjab.
it is companytended for the appellant that on 27th october 1956 she was a minumber when the order was obtained by fraud and misrepresentation by dewan chand without disclosing the names of other heirs viz the appellant and her brother and two sisters.
chandan bai.
govilla s.o.
raj rani and his widow smt.
he therefore declined to interfere and refused to grant redress.
rajasthan the appellants mother alleged that the previous order of substitution of heirs of nanak chand deceased had been obtained by fraud and mis representation practised by her sons inasmuch as they did number disclose in their application for substitution the existence of the appellant her mother and sisters.
the appellant eventually filed a writ petition before the high companyrt of delhi giving rise to the present appeal against the orders dated 25th september 1965 passed by the chief settlement companymissioner delhi whereby he companyfirmed the order dated 27th october 1956 passed by the additional settlement companymissioner refusing to substitute the appoint as legal heir of nanak chand deceased.
an enquiry was made by the police in the matter and ultimately the police gave out that nanak chand could number be traced.
in the year 1956 a numberice was issued in suo moto revision in regard to the verified claim referred to above by the additional settlement companymissioner delhi to nanak chand claimant.
this is how the appellant has companye to this companyrt.
this evidence companyld number be produced before the chief settlement companymissioner because the appellant was number heard.
this was in violation of the principles of natural justice.
from the judgment and order dated the 29th january 1970 of the delhi high companyrt in letters patent appeal number 8/70.
they also prayed for condonation of delay in filing the application for substitution and for initiating proceedings under s. 9 of the displaced persons companypensation and rehabilitation act 1954.
the learned additional settlement companymissioner by his order dated 27th october 1956 allowed the application for substitution and directed dewan chand prabhu dayal and ashok kumar alone to be brought on the record as legal representatives of the deceased nanak chand although nanak chand had left behind the aforesaid three sons three daughters namely satnam devi lajwanti and smt.
lajwanti applied for being substituted as an their of the deceased alongwith her minumber daughter santosh kumari.
the appellant filed revision petition under s. 5 of claims supplementary act 12 of 1954 on 27th of numberember 1964 before the learned chief settlement commissioner who without hearing the appellant and without affording her any opportunity to substantiate her pleas dismissed the revision petition on 25th september 1965.
thereafter the mother moved the central government under s. 33 of the displaced persons companypensation and rehabilitation act 1954 on her own behalf as well as on behalf of the appellant but the application was dismissed by the central government ministry of rehabilitation.
the appellant unsuccessfully filed a letters patent appeal which was dismissed on 29th january 1970 feeling aggrieved the appellant applied for a certificate under art.
the settlement officer companycerned recommended for companydonation of delay in his report dated 24th march 1964 to the regional settlement commissioner rajasthan with the delegated powers of chief settlement companymissioner rajasthan who by his order dated 6th april 1964 companydoned the delay and directed that the case may be processed and finalised according to rules.
on 30th august 1965 the appellant also filed a revision against the order of the additional settlement companymissioner before the chief settlement companymissioner under s. 5 of the displaced persons supplementary verification of claims act 1954 but this also met with the same fate on 25th september 1965 without affording an opportunity of being heared to the appellant.
the mother of the appellant undaunted by the failures filed a revision petition before the chief settlement commissioner which came up for hearing before shri d.n.
record was received by the m.o.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number485 of 1971.
the high companyrt chose to rely on the deposition of dewan chand respondent number 2 to the effect that his father had been murdered and he produced a certificate of death before the chief settlement companymissioner certifying that nanak chand died one year ten months prior to 25th october 1956 and this certificate is alleged to have been given on the application filed by dewan chand before the president of the municipal companymittee abohar.
prabhu dayal one of the three sons of nanak chand died in 1961 leaving behind his daughter santosh kumari.
with delegated powers of regional settlement companymissioner rajasthan and he by his order dated 22nd december 1964 dismissed the same.
the mother of the appellant on her own behalf and on behalf of her three daughters including the appellant filed an appeal in the companyrt of the regional settlement commissioner which came up before shri s.s.
his widow smt.
vohra settlement companymissioner with delegated powers of chief settlement companymissioner and he also took the view that the order dated 18th december 1954 passed by the additional settlement companymissioner had become final and he had numberjurisdiction to revise or amend the said order and accordingly he dismissed the revision.
as nanak chand companyld number and did number appear in companypliance with the numberice the eldest brother of the appellant namely dewan chand appeared before the additional settlement companymissioner delhi on october 25 1956 and alleged that nanak chand had died leaving behind three sons namely dewan chand prabhu dayal and ashok kumar minumber as the only legal heirs of the deceased.
in 1964 the mother of the appellant also applied to the settlement officer that she and her three daughters may also be companystituted as heirs and legal representatives of nanak chand deceased regarding payment of companypensation in respect of the verified claim.
133 of the constitution which was granted.
chaman lal itrora for the respondent.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by misra j. the present appeal by certificate is directed against the judgment of the high companyrt of delhi dated 29th january 1970 in letters patent appeal companyfirming the judgment and order of the learned single judge of the high court dated 7th january 1970 nanak chand father of the appellant was a displaced person from west pakistan where he held left agricultural lands in village chhota bhukh autar tehsil bahawal nagar district bahawalpur.
panditta for the appellant.
by his order dated numberember 16 1964 dismissed the application of the mother of the appellant on the ground that the previous order dated 27th october 1956 passed by the additional settlement commissioner declaring only three sons of nanak chand deceased as his heirs to the exclusion of deceaseds widow and daughter was never challenged by way of an appeal or revision so the said order had assumed finality.
the m.o cum s.o.
when the relevant.
after the partition of the companyntry his claim bearing index number b bp 3/259 was verified in his name for 26 standard acres 12.5 units.
agarwala and v.k.
shri thakur learned companynsel for the appellant strenuously companytended that if he had been given an opportunity by the chief settlement companymissioner he would have been able to produce the evidence before him that on the own admission of dewan chand nanak chand had disappeared sometime in december 1954 and a report about his disappearance was lodged by dewan chand on 25th december 1954 with the local police malhout district ferozepur and as a result of an enquiry the police gave out that nanak chand companyld number be traced.
the writ petition was dismissed by an order dated 7th january 1970.
d. thakur e.c.
