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

2008 Supreme(J&K) 330

MOHAMMAD YAQOOB MIR
Akhtara – Appellant
Versus
State Of J. &K. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Advocate For Appellant: M.M. Iqbal
Advocate For Respondent: M.M. Amin
Advocate For Respondent: Nemo

1. Invoking powers of revision under section 15 of Land Revenue Act, learned Financial Commissioner has set aside two mutations, one bearing no. 2855 dated 25.03.1999 and another no. 2853 dated 09.12.1999. Two revision petitions against the said two mutations were instituted on 10.07.2002.

2. The counsel for the petitioner would contend that both the revisions were barred by limitation should have been dismissed as such as warranted under Section 3 of the Limitation Act. Instead, Financial Commissioner has held that the issue of limitation is irrelevant. Though mutations admittedly have been attested at the back of the respondents but they had the knowledge which they had gained while pursuing the case pending in the Court of Munsiff, Chadoora, petitioner has sought issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing the order of learned Financial Commissioner.

3. Counsel appearing for the Respondents 2 to 6 contended that no period of limitation is prescribed for filing the revision. Power vested with Financial Commissioner has an object of undoing the wrong so as to bring record in tune with the factual requirements. In support of his contention, learned counsel has relied on the judgments



















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