Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA
Gour Chandra Ghosh – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.
1. The petitioners have prayed for setting aside the orders of the District Land and Land Reforms Officer, Murshidabad dated 02.05.2024 and 28.02.2025. By the order dated 02.05.2024 the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in preferring an appeal under Section 54 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act 1955 (for short “the 1955 Act”) challenging an order dated 17.01.2020 passed by the Prescribed Authority under Section 50 of the 1955 Act was allowed thereby condoning the delay in preferring the said appeal. By the order dated 28.02.2025, the appeal under Section 54 of the 1955 Act was allowed thereby setting aside the orders of the Prescribed Authority in the mutation cases under Section 50 of the 1955 Act with a direction upon the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Murshidabad-Jiyaganj to rehear the mutation cases afresh.
2. Petitioners claim to have acquired title in respect of the plots in question by dint of purchase from the erstwhile recorded owners. Petitioners claim to have mutated their names in respect of the said plots. Petitioners also claim to be in possession of the said plots. Upon enquiry from th
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal had exclusive jurisdiction to entertain disputes touching the provisions of a 'specified Act....
The jurisdiction of a High Court under Article 227 pertains only to the Debts Recovery Tribunal located within its territorial limits, not an appellate tribunal for matters originating outside its ju....
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
