Punjab and Haryana High Court: Petitioner had approached the Court before a Bench of Augustine George Masih, J., challenging order passed by the Financial Commissioner, Haryana, whereby the Commissioner had proceeded to set aside the mutation sanctioned in favour of petitioner and Respondent 7 as per their natural succession. Further ordered that the mutation be executed as per the registered Will in favour of Respondents 5 and 6 as the registered Wills were in favour of them.
Petitioner contended that respondent along with him were legal representatives of deceased and on his death had got the land mutated in their name. Thereafter, two registered Wills were produced and mutations were disputed. Authorities concerned considered two Wills not to be genuine, upheld mutation sanctioned in favour of petitioner and Respondent 7 but Financial Commissioner, Haryana, had set aside the above mutation and an order for its execution was passed in pursuance to the registered Will. The order passed by Financial Commissioner was contested on the ground that the Wills were forged and were not relating to agricultural land.
High court was of the view that it is the settled principle of law that the presumption attached with the registered Will with regard to its genuineness cannot be questioned before the revenue authorities. Since order passed by Financial Commissioner was based on the above-settled principle, this Court cannot interfere. Therefore, this petition was dismissed. [Bhagwan Dass v. State of Haryana, 2019 SCC OnLine P&H 62, decided on 23-01- 2019]