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

1990 Supreme(Pat) 448

G.C.BHARUKA
Bisheshwar Mahto – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Judgment

G.C.Bharuka, J.

1. The relief claimed in C.W.J.C. No. 5614 of 1987 is consequential to the result of C.W.J.C. No. 5615 of 1987, as such both the writ applications are being disposed of by a common judgment. C.W.J.C. No. 5615 of 1987 In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the orders contained in Annexures 1, 2 and 3, which have been passed by the Consolidation Authorities under the provisions of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Consolidation Act).

2. The petitioner and respondent No. 5 are the descendents of a common ancestor, Ramnevaj Singh. Ramnevaj Singh had two wives. From the first wife, he had one son Baldeo Singh. From his second wife he had two sons, Jagdish Singh and Rajmohan Singh. Jagdish Singh died issueless in 1934 leaving behind his wife Ramlochan Kuer and, therefore, she succeeded to the properties of her husband at that time as a limited owner but pursuant to Sec. 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, she became the full owner thereof, Rajmohan Singh died in 1962 leaving behind his two married daughters including Tara Devi, who is respondent No. 5 to the






































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