K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, DIPAK MISRA
State of Uttarakhand (Previously State of Uttar Pradesh) – Appellant
Versus
Mohan Singh – Respondent
Judgment :
1. Delay condoned.
2. Leave granted.
3. Heard learned counsel on either side.
4. Respondents herein had filed a suit, being Revenue Case No. 22/45 Year 1989-90, before the Sub Divisional Magistrate/Assistant Collector (SDM), under Section 229B of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (for short ‘U.P. Act’) stating that they were in continuous cultivation and in possession of land measuring 0.515 hectare in Plot No. 137 of Khata No. 44 in village Itawa Tehsil Sitargunj, District Nainital, for over 20 years. Despite having adverse possession, their names had not been recorded as Bhumidars in the Revenue Records and hence a declaration was sought for to that effect.
5. The Court of the SDM, however, dismissed the suit vide judgment dated 19.03.1991 holding that the respondents could not establish adverse and continuous possession over the disputed land and that the land in question belonged to Tharu tribe and the Bhumidar right could not be obtained by non- Tharu tribe persons. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the respondents took up the matter in appeal before the Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Kumaon Division, Nainital under Section 331 of t
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.