SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1973 Supreme(SC) 85

Y.V.CHANDRACHUD, J.M.SHELAT
Patiraji – Appellant
Versus
Mamta – Respondent


Advocates:
C.B.AGARWAL, C.P.LAL, JAGDISH SVARUP, R.K.BHATTACHARJI

Judgment

CHANDRACHUD, J. :- The question which arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the appellant Patiraji is entitled to the "Adhivasi" rights under Section 20 (b) (i) of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 ("the Act").

2. One Ram Adhar and the respondents were co-tenants of certain lands situated at Bibiganj, District Sultanpur. On the death of Ram Adhar on 24-2-1949 the appellant took proceedings under the U. P. Tenancy Act 1939 for a declaration that she was the widow of Ram Adhar and as such, had become a co-tenant along with the respondents. The appellant succeeded before the Assistant Collector but in appeal, the Additional Commissioner and then the Board of Revenue took a contrary view, holding that the appellant was not the widow of Ram Adhar. The judgment of the Board of Revenue is dated July 1, 1954.

3. In the meanwhile, the Act had come into force on July 1, 1952. The appellant then brought the present suit, treated as one under S. 20 (b) read with Section 232 of the Act. The case of the appellant is that her name was recorded as an occupant in the Khasra of 1356F, that she has therefore become an Adhivasi under Section 20 (b) (i) and is















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top