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

2006 Supreme(All) 2894

ASHOK BHUSHAN
JAGDISH NARAIN – Appellant
Versus
BOARD OF REVENUE, LUCKNOW – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
V.K.S. Chaudhary and K.N. Saxena for the Petitioners; Sharad Malviya for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Ashok Bhushan, J.—Heard Sri V.K.S. Chaudhary, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri K.N. Saxena, for the petitioners and Sri Sharad Malviya, appearing for respondent No. 2.

2. By this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 13th June, 2003 (Annexure-13 to the writ petition) passed by Board of Revenue allowing the revision filed by respondent No. 2 (Fazal Ahmad) under Section 219 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 and the order dated 8th July, 2003 (Annexure-14 to the writ petition) rejecting the review application filed by the petitioners for reviewing the order dated 13th June, 2003 of the Board of Revenue. The orders passed by Board of Revenue in revision arose from proceedings of mutation under Section 34 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901. The application for mutation dated 16.9.1996 was filed by respondent No. 2 praying for expunction of the name of the petitioners from the land in dispute on the basis of the order passed by Civil Court in favour of respondent No. 2, which was affirmed up to the Supreme Court vide judgment dated 12.1.1987. The respondent No. 2 in the mutation application stated that the grove in dispute was purchased by respon























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