B.DIKSHIT
SOM DATT – Appellant
Versus
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION SAHARANPUR – Respondent
A short question which arise for consideration in this writ * petition is as to whether a judgment passed on the concession of parties in an appeal in respect of allotment of chaks could be assailed by one of the party to concession in revision filed under Section 48 of U. P. Consolidation of "holdings Act on the ground that there was no written com promise between the parties and, there fore, the adjustment made in appeal could not be upheld for want of written com promise. According to statement of fact incorporated in order, the petitioner and contesting opposite parties agreed and the appellate authority adjusted chalks ac cordingly by recording concession made by parties in its judgment passed by Assistant Settlement Officer Consolidation, which the petitioner has challenged in revision filed under Section 48 of U. P. Consolida tion of Holdings Act which has given rise to this writ petition. The revision was op posed by contesting opposite party on the round that neither any consent was given y contesting opposite party before Assis tant Settlement Officer Consolidation nor any written compromise is available on the file of Assistant Settlement Officer Con solid
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.