DIPAK MISRA, SHIVA KIRTI SINGH
Satyendra Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Raj Nath Dubey – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Shiva Kirti Singh, J.
1. The appellants were successful before all the Consolidation Authorities, the Consolidation Officer, Settlement Officer Consolidation and Deputy Director of Consolidation whose orders passed in title proceedings, under U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) were challenged by the nonofficial respondents/writ petitioners by preferring Writ B No. 46506 of 2013 and the same has been allowed by the judgment and order under appeal dated 8.11.2013 passed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad.
2. High Court has, at the outset recorded in the judgment that there is no factual controversy in the writ proceedings and on that account the respondents chose not to file counter affidavit. With the consent of the parties the arguments were heard at the admission stage leading to final adjudication and remand which is under challenge.
3. The relevant facts necessary for understanding the subject matter of the dispute between the parties including the main issue, of res judicata are clear from the facts noted by the High Court in paragraph 3 and 4 of the impugned judgment. They are as follows:
“3
Mathura Prasad Sarjoo Jaiswal v. Dossibai N.B. Jeejeebhoy
Rajendra Prasad Gupta v. Prakash Chandra Mishra
Kalinga Mining Corporation v. Union of India
Isabella Johnson v. M.A. Susai
Bishwanath Prasad Singh v. Rajendra Prasad
Mohanlal Goenka v. Benoy Kishna Mukherjee
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.