1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6370/07 Kalyan Sahai vs. Distt. Sessions Judge, Jaipur District & Ors. Date of order : 21/2/2008. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Prahlad Sharma for the petitioner. ****** Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The writ petition has been filed against the order dated 24.5.2007 in the proceedings of probate pending before the learned District Judge, Jaipur. The probate proceedings have been ordered to be proceed as regular suit. The application was filed by the petitioner who was non-applicant no.2 before the court below under Order 8 Rule 1 (3) seeking to place on record the report of handwriting expert as also the order passed by Tehsildar attesting mutation of the land of deceased Suraj Mal in the name of petitioner and copy of jamabandi regarding that land. The learned District Judge though allowed the report of handwriting expert / forensic science laboratory to be placed on 2 record, but declined to permit placement of order passed by Tehsildar attesting mutation and copy of jamabandi holding that these documents have no relevancy to the controversy involved in the matter. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that these documents are certified copies and that were to prove the title of the petitioner of the land in dispute. They are very much relevant to decide the controversy involved in the matter. Learned counsel submits that mutation was entered in the name of the petitioner upon the satisfaction of the Tehsildar that the petitioner is entitled to the properties of late Suraj Mal Sharma as per law of inheritance contained in Hindu Succession Act. The impugned order is therefore liable to be set aside. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned, I find that the learned District Judge accepted the application to the extent of permitting the copy of the report of Forensic Science Laboratory as to the genuineness or otherwise of the agreement in dispute. The 3 proceeding of probate have been ordered to be continued as regular suit which will only determine the question whether the applicant before the Court is alone entitled to inherit the properties of the deceased Suraj Mal Sharma or if held otherwise, the properties left by him would devolve upon his legal heirs as per the law of inheritance. The mutation proceedings are conducted in the scope of Rule 134 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue (Land Records) Rules, 1939, which are summary in nature. They do not conclusively determine the title of the parties. Even if they have been attested in favour of the petitioner on the basis of law of inheritance, that argument in any case would be available to the petitioner citing his relationship with the deceased Suraj Mal Sharma as per the law. I therefore do not find any merit in this writ petition. The writ petition is dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/