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

2020 Supreme(SC) 223

R.BANUMATHI, S.ABDUL NAZEER, A.S.BOPANNA
ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER REVENUE – Appellant
Versus
AKHALAQ HUSSAIN – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant(s) :Jatinder Kumar Sethi, Ashutosh Kumar Sharma, Jatinder Kumar Bhatia, Advocates
For the Respondent(s):Manohar Pratap, Sanpreet Singh A., Manju Jetley, Advocates

JUDGMENT

R. Banumathi. J.

This appeal arises out of the impugned judgment dated 18.09.2008 passed by the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital in Writ Petition No. 670 of 2002 in and by which the High Court has set aside the orders of the Additional Commissioner (Revenue) dated 02.07.2002 and Additional Judicial Commissioner dated 30.06.2001 and also earlier order dated 19.07.2000 passed by the Assistant Collector/Pargana Magistrate.

2. Brief facts which led to filing of this appeal are as under:-

    Respondents Akhalaq Hussain and Saqir Hussain entered into an exchange with one Mangal Singh (a member of Scheduled Tribe) by way of a registered exchange deed dated 16.03.1994 whereby the respondents gave 41/2 Muthi of land, one Muthi is equal to 12.5 sq.mtrs. totalling 56.25 sq. mtrs., in village Khata No.36, Bandobast Khatuni Khata No.91 situated in village Vim Patti in District Pithoragarh in return for 12 Nali, one Nali is equal to 200 sq.mtrs. totalling 2400 sq.mtrs. of agricultural land in Bandobast Khatuni Khata No.43 situated in village Mall Ghorpatta, Munsiari, District Pithora


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