Back
MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Union Of India – Appellant
Versus
Anju Bhargava – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. On 13.10.2022, learned counsel for the petitioner sought time to seek instructions after arguing at length.
2. Today, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has instructions to argue the case on merit.
3. This writ petition has been filed assailing the legality and validity of the judgment and decree dated 20.08.2020 passed by the Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer (for brevity "the BoR") in Appeal No.2720/2020 whereby, the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the judgment and decree dated 18.02.2020 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority, Alwar (hereinafter referred to as "the RAA") in Appeal No.18/2019 preferred against the judgment and decree dated 03.06.2019 passed by the Court of Sub-Divisional Officer, Alwar (for short "the learned trial Court") in Case No.185/2014 decreeing the revenue suit filed by the respondents under Sections 88, 183 & 188 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (for brevity "the Act of 1955"), has been dismissed.
4. The relevant facts in brief are that the respondents No.1 to 6/plaintiffs (hereinafter referred to as "the plaintiffs") filed a revenue suit under Sections 88, 183 & 188 of the Act of 1955 against the petitioner/defen
The court upheld the concurrent findings of the revenue Courts and emphasized the limited jurisdiction of the court in issuing directions under a writ petition.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of not substituting the court's own conclusions for those reached by the lower courts, especially when there are concurrent findi....
The Board of Revenue exceeded its jurisdiction by reversing the Revenue Appellate Authority's well-reasoned findings based solely on the non-production of evidence, which was not a deliberate act of ....
Failure to frame proper issues after considering the averments in the plaint and the written statements can lead to a decision being remanded for a fresh decision.
The importance of evidence in establishing possession prior to 1955 and the need for proper evaluation of evidence by the Board of Revenue.
Point of Law : Proceedings initiated under Section 175 of Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 were justified and learned Board of Revenue, after duly taking into consideration facts and circumstances of case....
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
