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

2005 Supreme(Raj) 1200

SHIV KUMAR SHARMA
Somoti Devi – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared
Sanjay Mehrishi, for Petitioner;
Amit Jindal, for Respondents

Honble SHARMA, J.–The core question spring up for consideration is where no period of limitation is prescribed under the relevant provisions of the Statute, can the power be exercised by the authority at any time ?

(2). This question arises in the circumstances set out below:-

It is the case of the petitioner that land in question was being cultivated by the ancestors of Achhi Lal as Gair Maurisi Tenant and Khatedari rights were acquired. The name of the petitioners father was entered as Khatedar in Svt. 2020 (Year 1963) in the land records. On December 26, 1990 certain inhabitants of the village having grudge against the petitioner made complaint to Collector Alwar that the agricultural land in question was of Maufi of Moorti Mandi Sita Ram ji under the management of Achhi Lal and it was wrongly entered in the Khatedari of Acchi Lal. The Additional Collector in the order dated July 26, 1994 after observing that the name of Achhi Lal was wrongly entered as khatedar remitted the record to the Director Land Records Revenue Board Ajmer, for making a reference to the Board of Revenue. The Director, in turn, made a reference to the Board of Revenue vide judgment dated August 8, 1997. The






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