Back
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
Torrent Industry Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The instant writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed for following reliefs:
(ii) For issuance of further writ, order or direction in the nature of prohibition prohibiting the Deputy Commissioner (Land Reforms), Ranchi to proceed with Mutation Appeal No. 84-R-15/2012-13 as the said appeal has been filed by Respondent No. 5 Jitendra Kumar Singh who has no locus standi to file the said appeal.
2. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleadings made in the writ petition, is that the land forming the subject matter of the instant writ petition, situated at Khata No. 113/158, R.S. Plot No. 754, Area 73 decimal, Village Kathalgonda, Thana No. 201, Holding No. 153/D, Ward No. 18, was owned and possessed by Vidya Nath Singh Deo and Pushpendra Nath Singh Deo through their predecessor-in-interest. The case of the petitioner is that the vendors offered to s
The main legal point established in the judgment is that when an alternative efficacious remedy is available to a petitioner, a writ petition for quashing an order may not be maintainable.
The court emphasized that the order of mutation neither confers nor extinguishes any right of the parties over the land and that the purpose of mutation is only to collect government revenue from a p....
A landowner's right to mutate property based on a registered sale deed cannot be legally denied without lawful acquisition or evidence of ownership disputes.
Mutation authority verifies only vendor's existing entry and transfers to purchaser; title disputes settled exclusively in civil court, not interfering absent civil decree.
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
