Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Shri Valley Refractories Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand through Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY, J.
1. This first appeal has been filed against the Judgement dated 22.06.2023 and decree sealed and signed on 30.06.2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge, (Sr. Div.)-X, Dhanbad in Original Suit No. 258 of 2022 whereby and whereunder the suit has been dismissed.
2. The suit was filed by the plaintiff for the following reliefs:
(a) For a decree for declaration of proposed plaintiff right, title, interest and confirmation of possession over schedule land, alternatively, if proposed plaintiff be found dispossessed lis-pendens, then recovery of khas possession thereof.
(b) For a decree for rectification of Record of right in the name of proposed plaintiff after deleting the name of “ANABAD BIHAR SARKAR” (Now Jharkhand), the proposed defendants.
(c) For a decree for permanent injunction restraining proposed defendants their men, agents and servants from interfering in any manner with proposed plaintiff settled possession and/or from parting with any portion of the suit land by the proposed defendants on the strength of such wrong and frivolous entries in record of rights.
(d) For cost of the suit.
(e) For any other and further relief or reliefs for which the p
The presumption of correctness of entries in the record of rights under the Bihar Land Reforms Act is rebuttable, and mere possession does not confer title without proof of vendor's title.
Revenue records do not confer title; ownership must be established through valid documentation and historical possession.
A plaintiff must present compelling evidence to rebut existing presumptions in property records; otherwise, a suit can be dismissed, especially when considering limitation laws.
Entries in revenue records do not create or extinguish title; the right to sue arises from the threat of dispossession, and possessory title can be sufficient to establish ownership against all but t....
A plaintiff must establish their own ownership in a suit for title and possession, as entries in revenue records do not confer title.
Settlement record of rights does not extinguish prior title, and collusive judgments lack binding authority on necessary parties.
The burden of proof lies on the party asserting ownership or adverse possession, and mere entries in khatian records do not suffice to establish title without supporting evidence.
In a suit for declaration of title, the plaintiff must prove ownership; failure to seek possession forfeits claims against an adverse possessor.
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
