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

1966 Supreme(P&H) 151

R.S.NARULA
Chhutmal – Appellant
Versus
Additional Director, Consolidation Of Holdings – Respondent


Judgment

R.S.Narula, J.

1. The answer to the solitary and short question raised by the petitioners in this case depends upon the interpretation and scope of the second proviso to rule 18 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Rules, 1949 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Punjab Rules) framed under the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (hereinafter called the Act).

2. The petitioners and respondent No. 2 are right-holders of village Singar, Tehsil Ferozepore Jhirka, District Gurgaon. Consolidation work in that village was started by notification dated July 11, 1956. The consolidation scheme was published on April 18, 1957, and confirmed on May 29, 1957. Repartition proceedings under Section 21(1) of the Act were carried out on December 12, 1957, and after the culmination of the entire proceedings, the record was consigned on February 28, 1959.

3. More than 3 1/2 year later, respondent No. 2 moved the State Government under Section 42 of the Act on October 9, 1962. Before that, rule 18 prescribing six months period of limitation for making an application under Section 42 of the Act had been enforced





























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