Back
SURESHWAR THAKUR, LALIT BATRA
Bishan Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Mr. Sureshwar Thakur, J.
In the instant petition, the petitioner has sought the quashing of the concurrently made orders, enclosed in Annexures P-3 to P-6.
2. In a suit bearing No. 8/DC of 1999-2000, instituted by the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Gharaunda, against the defendants thereins, claiming therebys the rendition of a declaratory decree vis-a-vis the disputed lands, thus the said espoused decree became assigned to the plaintiff-BDPO concerned, through an order made thereons, on 20.2.2002 (Annexure P-3). In the said suit became arrayed, thus as the respondents, apart from the State of Haryana, The Director, Consolidation, Haryana, Chandigarh, The Settlement Officer, Consolidation of Holdings, Rohtak, The Tehsilidar, Consolidation, Karnal, The Tehsildar, Revenue, and, also the private respondents, one of whom was the petitioner-Bishan Singh (since deceased). The said suit was primarily resisted by the private respondents, on the premise that respectively through Annexure P-1, and, Annexure P-2, as became drawn by the authorities contemplated under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (for short 'th
The jurisdiction under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings Act is limited to clerical corrections and does not extend to adjudicating title disputes over shamlat deh lands.
The Director of Consolidation lacks jurisdiction to alter finalized consolidation schemes under the Consolidation Act, which can only be revoked by the State Government.
The jurisdiction under Section 42 of the Act is limited to clerical corrections and does not extend to adjudicating disputed titles, which must be resolved by Civil Courts.
The jurisdiction under Section 42 of the Consolidation of Holdings Act is limited to correcting clerical errors and cannot be used to alter finalized consolidation schemes or adjudicate disputed titl....
Authorities under the East Punjab Holdings Act lack power to review orders under Section 42; disputes regarding land titles must be resolved in civil court.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited jurisdiction of the consolidation authorities under Section 42 of the Consolidation Act, emphasizing their inability to decide disputed....
The court emphasized the limitations of the authority under Section 42 of the Consolidation Act 1948 and highlighted the distinction between 'Shamilat Deh' and 'Jumla Mushtarka Malkan' in the context....
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
