Back
MINI PUSHKARNA
Sh. Charan Singh (since Deceased Through Lrs) – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing]
Mini Pushkarna, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 23358/2023 (Application under Section 151 of CPC on behalf of the petitioner for exemption from filing of certified/original annexures.)
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
2. Application is disposed of.
W.P.(C) 5949/2023 & CM APPL. 23357/2023 (Application under Section 151 of CPC on behalf of the petitioner seeking interim-relief.)
3. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner is praying for declaration as the bhumidar of the lands admeasuring 43 bighas forming part of khasra no. 784 situated in the revenue estate of Village Madanpur Khadar, New Delhi.
4. It is the contention on behalf of the petitioner that a suit was filed in the year 1981 before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) for declaration of bhumidari rights. The petitioner was declared as a bhumidar by the learned SDM. Against the said order, the Gram Sabha filed an appeal before the Additional District Magistrate (ADM). The appeal filed on behalf of Gram Sabha was allowed by the learned ADM. Thereafter, the matter went right upto the Supreme Court. By order dated 05.02.1996, in SLP No. 8960/1986, the Supreme Court remanded back
The legal proceedings under the DLR Act would not be maintainable in an urbanised area, and the petitioner was granted liberty to approach a Civil Court for the declaration of bhumidari rights.
The judgment established the principle that the provisions of the DLR Act cease to apply after urbanization of the land, as interpreted from Section 507(a) of the Act, 1957 and the decision in Mohind....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954, and the interpretation of its provisions regarding bhumidari rights, res judicata, and the lim....
The legal principle established is the need for a time-bound resolution of proceedings under the Delhi Land Reforms Act to prevent infringement of legal rights.
The authority must evaluate claims for bhumidhari rights based on merits before judicial intervention is warranted.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a challenge to a Bhumidhari Certificate filed 50 years later was grossly barred by delay and laches, and that the Appellant, who was not in ph....
The court emphasized the importance of adjudicating upon the petitioner's application for correction of revenue entries and granted the petitioner liberty to seek mutation of the land.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the refusal of LSR/NOC by the respondent No.2 was not justified, and the objections raised under the Land Restriction Act were not applicable ....
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
