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

2001 Supreme(Jhk) 25

M.Y.EQBAL
Dilip Kumar Mahto – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


ORDER

M.Y. Eqbal, J.

1. Heard Mr. A.K. Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.K. Sahani learned counsel for the respondents, and with their consent this writ application is disposed of at this stage.

2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 16.12.1998 passed by Additional Collector, Ranchi in Mutation Revision No. 660 R- 15/96-97 in exercise of powers conferred under Section 16 of the Bihar Tenants Holdings (Maintenance of Records Act, 1973 whereby he has set aside the order dated 21.2.1997 passed by respondent No. 3 Land Reforms Dy. Collector, Khunti in Mutation Appeal No. 15/95-96 and also order dated 19.8.1995 passed by Circle Officer, in Mutation case No. 141/95-96.

3. The only question falls for consideration is that whether zamabandi running in favour of the petitioner for more than a decade could be cancelled at the instance of the respondents who claimed their title over the property on the basis of purchase. It has not been disputed that the name of the petitioner was entered in the revenue record of right in the year 1978 and he has been paying rent to the State of Bihar since then. The concerned respondents on the basis of purchase made in the year 1994 mad



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