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

1958 Supreme(P&H) 142

A.N.BHANDARI, S.S.DULAT
Punjab State – Appellant
Versus
Mehr Chand – Respondent


Judgment

A.N.Bhandari, J.

1. This appeal under Clause 10 of, the Letters Patent raises the question whether the Assistant Custodian was justified in declining to confirm a certain sale under the provisions of Sub-section (4) of Section 40 of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950.

2. On the 22nd September, 1947 Mehar Chand petitioner purchased two houses, one from Dehru for a sum of Rs. 700/- and the other from Hussain for a sum of Rs. 300/-. He applied to the Custodian for confirmation of the sales but his application was rejected by the Assistant Custodian by means of a small order which was in the following terms:

"The transaction relates to sale of house situated in rural area. The Custodian has by his order dated 29th January, 1950 decided that all such transactions shall be treated as relating to land in rural areas. In view of this, the application for confirmation of transaction is dismissed. However, claim for Rs. 700/- will he entered in the register as an-unsecured claim....."

3. The petitioner presented a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution which came up for hearing before a learned Single Judge of this Court. The learned Single Judge came to the con















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