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

1971 Supreme(All) 113

K.B.SRIVASTAVA
Chandra Shekhar – Appellant
Versus
Director of Consolidation, U. P. , Lucknow – Respondent


Advocates:
Mohd. Husain, for Petitioners; H.D. Srivastava, for Opposite Parties.

ORDER :- This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, raises a point of law.

2. The dispute between the petitioners Chandra Shekhar, Sheo Shanker and Hari Shanker and the respondent Beni Madho and Harakh Narain and Shrimati Dhanpati and her minor sons Sheo Kumar, Om Prakash, Gyan Prakash, Anil Kumar and Rakesh Kumar related to the plots comprised in Khatas 3, 25 and 65, situate in Punpur, hamlet of village Kheda, in the district of Sultanpur. These Khatas comprised several plots including plots Nos.25, 37 and 1145. All the plots stood recorded in the name of Beni Madho, opposite party No.4. During the consolidation operations, the petitioners filed an objection before the Assistant Consolidation Officer, opposite party No.3. Similar objections were filed by Harakh Narain, opposite party No.5 and by Dhanpati on her own behalf and on behalf of her five minor sons. Dhanpati and her minor sons have not been impleaded as parties to this writ petition. Each objector claimed rights in the plots comprised in the said two Khatas. They entered into a compromise (Annexure 1) on January 21, 1967 and filed and verified the same before the Assistant Consolidation Officer. An order (A





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