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

1995 Supreme(All) 1029

N.L.GANGULY
SRIDHAR TRIPATHI – Appellant
Versus
BOARD OF REVENUE U P – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.N.Verma, G.N.VERMA, H.M.B.SINHA, Laxmi Kant, PARMATMA RAI, R.N.UPADHYA,

N. L. GANGULY, J.

The petitioner challenged the orders dated 10-7-92 and 18-1-1989 passed by the Board of Revenue, U. P. and Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Gyanpur, district Varanasi and prayed for quashing of the said orders. The petitioner pleaded that he is the Bhumidhar of plot No. 48 area 1 bigha 1 dhoors in village Pure Bahuria, Vaida Khas, Taluka Kodh, district. Varanasi. The opposite party No. 3 moved application in 1987 under Section 33/39 of Land Revenue Act for mutating his name in the said plot stating that he had purchased the land from the petitioner in 1967 was stated in the applications for mutation that during consolidation proceeding his name was recorded in Akrapatra 45 but the same was not carried through

in the revenue courts. The name of the respondent No. 3 does not appear in the village records also. The mutation application was contested by the petitioner on the ground that his name continued recorded in the revenue records and during the consolidation proceedings also and thereafter the petitioners name continues over the land in question. The petitioner denied that at any point of time during the Consolidation proceedings, the name of the opposite party No. 3















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