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

1963 Supreme(All) 96

R. S. PATHAK, V. G. OAK, M. C. DESAI
MANHOO MAL – Appellant
Versus
MULLOO – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.C.SHARMA, S.B.JOHARI, SHANTI BHUSHAN

DESAI, C. J.


( 1 ) THIS is an appeal by a plaintiff whose suit under Section 209 of the Zamindari Abolition and land. Reforms Act for possession over a plot of agricultural land has been dismissed by the courts below. The facts, as found by them, are that the land id dispute was Sir of the appellant on 30-6-1962 the day preceding the date of vesting mentioned in Section 4 of the Act. In 1358 fasli corresponding to 1950-51 the respondent took unlawful possession of the land. After the act came into force on 1-7-1952, the appellant sued the respondent claiming that he acquired bhumidari rights over it by virtue of Section 18 and alleging that the respondent acquired no right whatsoever under the Act and was liable to be ejected under Section 209 as a trespasser. He also claimed damages. The suit was contested by the respondent, who claimed to have been in possession for more than 12 years as a hereditary tenant and to have acquired adhiyasi right under Section 3 of the Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms (Supplementary) Act 31 of 1952 which matured into sirdari rights under Section 240-B of the Act. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court on 14-10-1953 and by the lower appellate































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