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

2007 Supreme(Ori) 417

A.S.NAIDU
Harihar Panigrahi – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner, Consolidation – Respondent


Advocates:
For Petitioners:M/s. R.N. Mohanty-2 and Associates.
For Opp.Party Nos.5 to 11:M/s. D.B.Das and Associ¬ates.

JUDGMENT

A. S. NAIDU, J. The judgment passed by the Addl. Commission¬er, Consolidation, Bhubaneswar in Revision Case No.362/1993 confirming the order passed by the appellate Court is assailed in this writ application.

2. Bereft of unnecessary details, certain relevant facts which would be necessary for answering the questions raised are as follows:

The disputed lands along with other lands originally be¬longed to one Kanduru, S/o. Behari Maharana. Kanduri had four sons being Chintei, Ananda, Nanda and Kanda, who succeeded the properties left by their father. Thereafter they separated the properties and possessed the lands according to their allotments. Nanda, one of the sons of Kanduri, died in the year 1934 leaving behind his widow, Janaki Bewa. Janaki Bewa sold the lands in question by a registered sale deed in favour of Hadibandhu and it is alleged that from Hadibandhu the present petitioners purchased the lands in the year 1951. Thereafter they remained in posses¬sion of the said lands exclusively by constructing residential house on a portion of the lands and by planting different varie¬ties of trees on other portions. In the year 1971 disputes cropped with regard to the prope





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