Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J
Ashok Kumar Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Tata Iron & Steel Company Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Heard learned counsel for the appellants.
2. This second appeal has been preferred against the judgment of affirmation dated 27.05.2024 and the decree following thereupon drawn up on 06.06.2024 by learned Principal District Judge, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur in Civil Appeal No. 56 of 2009 whereby said appeal filed by the original defendant no.1 has been dismissed upholding and confirming the judgment dated 14.10.2009 and decree dated 06.11.2009 passed by the learned Sub-Judge-V at Jamshedpur in Title Suit No. 123 of 1987 and also against the judgment dated 14.10.2009 and the decree dated 06.11.2009 passed by the learned Sub-Judge-V at Jamshedpur in Title Suit No. 123 of 1987 whereby the said suit filed by the respondent no.1 herein, was decreed on contest with cost against the original defendant no.1 was ordered.
3. The case of the plaintiff/ Principal respondent No. 1 in short is that the land in R.S. Plot no. 401 and 416 alongwith other lands were acquired before the Revisional Survey Settlement, 1937 by the then Provincial Government under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. During the R.S. settlement of 1937 the lands in R.S. Plot no, 4
The court affirmed the plaintiff's title to land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, rejecting the defendants' adverse possession claims and validating the lease agreements under the Transfer of....
The settlement order, revenue records, and lack of evidence supporting adverse possession claims were crucial in establishing the plaintiffs' continuous possession and defeating the defendants' claim....
The need for a fair consideration of evidence and the requirement for the Government to disclose crucial evidence in land dispute cases.
Revenue records do not confer title; ownership must be established through valid documentation and historical possession.
Termination of tenancy – Once relationship of lessor and lessee is established defendant or subsequent purchaser cannot question title of original lessor.
A minor cannot acquire property rights through settlement, and claims must be substantiated by proper documentation to establish title and possession.
The tenant cannot question the title of the lessor during tenancy, and the lessor retains rights despite changes in property status under the Bihar Land Reforms Act.
Finality of prior judgments remains protected under law, preventing challenges in subsequent proceedings unless reversed through appropriate means.
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
