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

1973 Supreme(Ori) 40

B.K.RAY, R.N.MISRA
LAXMIDHAR PANIGRAHI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.C.JAGDEV RAY

R. N. MISRA, J.

( 1 ) BOTH these writ applications are petitions for certiorari. Several orders passed by the Revenue Officer, the appellate authority and the revisional authority under the Orissa Land Reforms Act are impugned in these writ petitions. The oetitioner in both the writ petitions is the same person but some of the opposite parties are different

( 2 ) OPPOSITE party No. 3 In O. J. C. 802/1970 and opposite parties 3 and 4 in O. J. C. 803 of 1970 separately applied to the Revenue Officer (opposite party No. 2 in both the writ petitions) for determination of their respective tenancv interests in the lands in question under the petitioner and the other opposite parties -- Padma Dibya and Baidei Dei. The petitioner and his relations opposed the claim by saying that the applications before the Revenue Officer were made mala fide by persons who had no connection with the lands in question. Their possession as tenants was seriously disputed.

( 3 ) THE Revenue Officer held local enquiry on 25-12-1966. It is stated that he received some evidence from the people who were present at the spot and made some confidential enquiry. On the basis of such materials he found the claim of





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