Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
RAJIV ROY
Sunil kumar Singh Son of late Badri Narayan Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of the original lease and petitioners' claims. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. respondents' arguments against the petitioners' claims. (Para 11 , 15 , 16) |
| 3. admitted facts of the case by the court. (Para 37 , 38) |
| 4. court's ruling on the validity of contested orders. (Para 42 , 49) |
JUDGMENT :
(i) the issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents to show cause as to why not the order dated 21.01.1997 passed by the respondent no.2 (Annexure 1) as also the order dated 11.12.1980 passed by the respondent no.5 (Annexure-2) be not quashed;
(iii) further restrain the respondent no.6 from taking possession of the disputed house on the basis of the impugned order.
(A) PETITIONER’s VERSION:
3. The details of the land in question for which the lease deeds were made is/are as under:-
4. The contention of the petitioners is/are that after the settlement of the leased land in the year 1939, Bhola Singh constructed a residential house where their family members are/were residing, a fact also found true by the Circle Officer in his earlier local inspection. In the revisional survey held in the year 1976 also, the petitioners were found in possession over
The renewal of a lease requires timely applications and continuous possession; failure to meet these criteria results in loss of entitlement, as established in the case.
The determination of the lease was based on the lessee's breach of lease conditions, and the pending renewal application was directed to be considered by the appellant within 6 months.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Collector's duty is to act in conformity with the provisions of law and that the possession of the land for more than five years satisfies....
Sub-lease agreement - Rights of Co-sharer - Co-sharer has no right to alienate entire property to confer exclusive right on alienee without consent of other co- owners and such transfer is invalid fo....
The resumption of land under Section 3-B cannot be solely based on observations of land lying fallow; substantial evidence of actual non-use for its intended purpose is required.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of the exemption certificate under Section 88C of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, in determining proc....
An order made without jurisdiction is null and void, reinforcing the established property rights in land ownership disputes under the Odisha Survey and Settlement Act, 1958.
An order made without jurisdiction is void and cannot be sustained; ownership rights established must be recognized despite conflicting authority actions.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
