Dear Learned Counsels,
My issue is whether Tehsildar is empowered to entertain and rest his award under Sec 70b of BTA, 1948 on a forged (a document having additons and deletions of names and unattested) "unregistered stamp non judicial stamp paper" "purchased by appeallant "submitted by him calling himself a "tenant" on that basis.
The matter is:We sisters and two brothers inherited a peice 3.5 acres of barren land without encumbrances (absolute No tenancy) in our village from our father who died intestate in 1978. The land contained small amounts of mineral. (permission to mine was granted by Govt also but disbanded by us due to inferior quality) All children were unmarried young aged. Mother is predeceased. The 7/12 extract contains the names of all the children. The land is a without tenancy till date. The neighbouring land owner is the son of the one of the three previous differnt landowners from whom we purchased the suit land under registered sale deed in 1965. He behind our back in 2009, submitted a nonjudicial stamp paper (purchased by himself) purportedly showing a sammati patra purporting a transcation done by my brother (deceased) allowing him and two other unconnected persons to tenancy for a thousand rupees.Samnewala has cacelled the name of on brother and put another's name in several places in the document and references are kept as it is.All this is unattested. The signature is also forged.The other living brother knows nothing of the transaction and is an apeallant with us.
The said document( 50rs Stamp paper) is purchased by the samnewala himself. The document is full of unattested corrections which do not match the referece to context. The tehsildar has relied upon this defaced document as evidence and gave an exparte award granting tenancy.We got all papers through RTI. We contested it at SDO level but failed due to greasing by opponets.The samnewala moved 32 G for purchase of land behaind our back as SDO delayed the result (probably for want of grease as is the situation in districts). but it was thwarted by us citing essentiality of 70b before 32G is to be proceeded. We again appealed in Revenue Tribunal and won it. the case was directed and returned to SDO being a art 227 matter and exparte eligible for to repeal.It was heard and returned to Tehsildar now citing the admisibility flaws in the award pointed by us after admitting our evidenses and say on the fraudulent document. Another feature of the case is that the entire case is proceeded against my deceased brother after his death ie the notices and paper notices are sent after his death and the award is also given 10 months after his death.No heirs were brought on record.
My contention is : Generally any evidence submitted should be clean in all respects for the judge to decide.
Tehsildar as per law of 70b of BTA (only empowered officer for tenancy) can admit a document puporting a transaction ie correct referece to context.
Question 1: But is he empowered admit a debateable document allegedly fraudulent which has number of corrections and deletions in names of the brothers done without attestation not matching with the reference to context.(matter relates to one brother but because the name is struck off and second bro's name is written therefore does not match reference to the other.)?.
Question 2.What happens if matter is proceeded and heard and awarded against a dead respondent (original).?
Kindly provide some relief on my question if available citations on both questions may be refered so that I can find out.
