SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1989 Supreme(Raj) 216

M.C.JAIN
Legal Representatives of Jasraj – Appellant
Versus
Dhingarmal – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
M.L. Shreemali. for Petitioners; G.R. Singhvi, for Non-petitioner

MILAP CHANDRA, J.—This revision petition has been filed against the order of the Munsiff, Siwana dated November 24, 1988 by which he has held that the "patta" granted by the Gram Panchayat is compulsorily registrable and may be read in evidence for collateral purpose only. The facts of the case giving rise to this revision petition may be summarised thus,

2. The plaintiff-non-petitioner filed a suit for injunction and demolition of the construction raised by the defendant-petitioner on the disputed land in respect of which a patta was granted to him by the Gram Panchayat, Siwana. In support of his case, the defendant-petitioner filed the patta granted to him and wanted to get if exhibited. The plaintiff-non-petitioner raised an objection that the patta was granted for over Rs. 100/-, it was compulsorily registrable and as such it cannot be exhibited as it is not registered under the Registration Act. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, the learned Munsif passed the impugned order.

3. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the defendant-petitioner that the patta was granted by the Gram Panchayat for and on behalf of the Government of Rajasthan





Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top