Back
MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Ram Chandra – Appellant
Versus
Ramsahai – Respondent
ORDER
1. Heard.
2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 05.04.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the learned Single Judge refused to interfere with the order of the Board of Revenue which remanded the case for trial afresh.
3. The appellant herein filed the writ petition under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India on the pleadings inter alia that their existed a dispute with regard to right in respect of the land bearing Khasra No.247/333. The dispute remained unresolved and finally the appellant filed the suit before the Sub-Divisional Officer for declaration and correction of entries in revenue records that the appellants/writ petitioners are the rightful owners of the land in dispute which has been erroneously entered in the name of respondents. The suit was dismissed against which the revision was preferred before the Board of Revenue. As the pleadings stated, the Board of Revenue passed an order on 25.07.2011 in revision directing Assistant Collector/Executive Magistrate, Amer to decide the suit No.596/2002 and suit No.368/2007 simultaneously. Thereafter, the Assistant Collector stayed the proceedings of suit No. 596/2002 and suit No.368/2007 was
The proviso to sub-Section (3) of Section 49 of the Land Revenue Code does not apply if the first appellate authority has not decided the case on merits.
Revenue courts cannot adjudicate the legality and validity of a registered sale deed in summary proceedings, and there are exceptions under which a Writ petition may be entertained against orders pas....
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 entertaining a revision against a non-meritorious permit to withdraw, as the underlying assistant collector's order remained unchallenged.
A revision petition against an ex-parte ad-interim stay order is not maintainable if an appeal is available under the relevant legal provisions.
A revision petition before the Board of Revenue is not maintainable when an appeal provision is available. An aggrieved party can either move the appellate court or approach the same court which pass....
The court emphasized the importance of proper exercise of revisional jurisdiction and the need for valid mutations in land disputes.
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
