Back
SAMEER JAIN
Amar Chand S/o Moolchand – Appellant
Versus
Jitendra S/o veerumal – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Present petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India against the order dated 29.06.2016, passed by learned Board of Revenue (BOR) Ajmer in Revision/6763/2011, whereby revision-petition filed by the respondents was allowed. The matter pertains to Mutation Entry No. 192 dated 20.04.2002, passed by the Gram Panchayat, Sandeda, Tehsil Peeplu, District Tonk.
2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the disputed land in question measuring 29 Bigas 11 Biswa belonged to ancestors of petitioner and the performa respondents, but in the records, the said land was wrongly entered in the name of one Veerumal S/o Relumal Sindhi, by the department of settlement in Samvat 2028. Thereafter, mutation No. 192 dated 20.04.2002 was wrongly opened in favour of the respondents as legal successors of Veerumal S/o Relumal without proper enquiry of the legal successors and against the provisions of Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 and also against the provisions of Section 42 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the appeal against the same, preferred by the petitioners, before Sub Divisional Officer (SDO), Pip
Point of Law : Court is in complete agreement with reasoning adopted by BOR - There is no violation of principles of natural justice and no palpable error has crept in the order of the BOR.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Section 65 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879 in the context of a land dispute.
The court's decision emphasized the importance of upholding orders based on reports submitted by relevant authorities and the limited scope of interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of In....
Revenue authorities are barred from interfering with long-standing mutation entries after an inordinate delay, and a revisional authority must set aside an order it finds legally flawed rather than c....
The court emphasized the importance of proper exercise of revisional jurisdiction and the need for valid mutations in land disputes.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the cancellation of a mutation must adhere to the principles of natural justice and statutory provisions, and the authority reviewing the muta....
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
