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

2003 Supreme(Pat) 255

NAGENDRA RAI, RAJENDRA PRASAD
Kapildeo Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Judgment

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 5.12.1994 passed by the Additional Collector, East Champaran, Motihari in Mutation Revision Case No. 18 of 1994- 95, by which he has allowed the revision application filed by respondent no. 6 challenging the order dated 19.7.1994 passed by the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Sikarahana in Appeal No. 6 of 1993-94, whereby the Deputy Collector Land Reforms allowed the appeal filled by the petitioner and set aside the order of mutation dated 15.12.1993 passed in favour of respondent no. 6 by the Anchal Adhikari, Dhaka in Mutation Case No. 1148 of 1992-93.

3. The dispute between the parties is with regard to 1 bigha 6 katha of land of khata no. 83 Khesra No. 741 in village Barharwa Lakhansen. Respondent no. 6 filed mutation case under the provisions of the Bihar Tenants Holdings (Maintenance of Records) Act, 1973, hereinafter referred to as the Act for mutation of his name against the petitioners. The Anchal Adhikari allowed the mutation case, as stated above, under section 14 of the Act against the petitioners. The petitioners filed an appeal before the Deputy Collector Land Reforms und











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