Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Lakshmiben Premjibhai Vaja – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ownership and delay in revisional action. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments concerning the status of the petitioner. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's observations on the need for timely action. (Para 5) |
| 4. revisional actions governed by principles of equity. (Para 6) |
| 5. result and quashing of previous orders. (Para 7 , 8) |
ORDER :
ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.
1. By the present Special Civil Application, the petitioner is impugning the order dated 22.08.2013 passed by the respondent No.2 Collector, Amreli in Revision Case No.107 of 2012, which has been upheld by the order dated 29.01.2016 passed by the learned Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department in Revision Application No.90 of 2013.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has purchased the agricultural land bearing survey Nos.33/1, 34/1, 34/2 and 35/2 admeasuring 97812 sq.mtrs, situated at Village Timbi, Taluka Jafarabad, District Amreli for valuable consideration by way of registered sale deed dated 16.01.2009. On the basis of the said sale deed, the revenue entry No.2660 came to be effected in favour of the petitioner on 08.04.2009, which came to be certified on 26.08.2009. That thereafter, by way of revenue entry No.2767,
Revisional powers in land disputes must be exercised within a reasonable time; otherwise, established agricultural rights cannot be annulled.
Authority must exercise revisional powers within a reasonable time to ensure legal rights are not unjustly compromised.
Revisionary powers must be exercised within a reasonable timeframe; actions taken after significant delays are deemed unjustifiable, preserving the validity of transactions during that period.
The delay of 11 years in exercising suo motu powers renders such actions arbitrary, violating established legal rights under registered sale deeds.
Suo motu revisional powers must be exercised within a reasonable period; delays result in the action being considered arbitrary and may infringe on established rights.
The court ruled that summary eviction proceedings under the Saurashtra Gharkhed Ordinance must be initiated within a reasonable time, and transactions deemed invalid under Section 54 remain valid unt....
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
