Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN, J
Heersingh S/o Sawai Singh – Appellant
Versus
Roopdan S/o Magandan Charan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition challenging orders (Para 1) |
| 2. application under section 251 (Para 2) |
| 3. tehsildar's proceedings (Para 3) |
| 4. pleadings of respondents (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 5. appeal before additional district collector (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 6. counsel for respondents (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 7. consideration of rival submissions (Para 15) |
| 8. jurisdiction of tehsildar (Para 16 , 17) |
| 9. modification of powers (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 10. writ petition allowed (Para 27 , 28) |
Order :
“It is therefore humble respectfully prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed and the order dated 16.04.2021 (Annx.5) passed by the Board of Revenue, Ajmer in Revision Petition No.4504/2015; Roopdan & Ors. Vs. Heer Singh & Ors., may be quashed and the order dated 18.06.2015 (Annx.3) passed by the court of Additional District Collector, Jalore in first Revenue Appeal No.82/2015; Heer Singh & Ors. Vs. Roopdan & Ors., may be upheld. Any other appropriate writ order or direction which this Hon’ble Court deems fit may be passed in favour of the petitioners.
2) The brief facts leading to the present writ petition is that the respondents No.1 to 5 have made an application unde
The Tehsildar exceeded jurisdiction by acting before the Gram Panchayat's decision, necessitating civil suits for disputed easement claims rather than summary proceedings.
Suppression of material facts and illegal orders by the Tahsildar led to the dismissal of the petitions, emphasizing the importance of disclosing all relevant information and the need for due process....
Concurrent findings of fact are binding unless based on no evidence or misreading of material.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948, in cases involving easement ri....
The court found that civil suit maintainability was not barred by statutory inquiries regarding public road rights, affirming jurisdiction and upholding the enabling nature of relevant legislative pr....
Revision petitions under Section 230 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act are not maintainable against interim orders, which are not final adjudications, reinforcing the distinction between revisional and ap....
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
