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

2006 Supreme(All) 906

KRISHNA MURARI
HASAN RAZA – Appellant
Versus
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION – Respondent


KRISHNA MURARI, J.

Heard Sri S. C. Verma learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Tripathi B. G. Bhai for contesting respondent Nos. 2 to 4.

2. The dispute relates to plot No. 993 situate in village Gajehra, Tahsil Bansi, District Basti. In the basic year the said plot was recorded in the name of the petitioners. An objection under Section 9-A (2) of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (for short the Act) was filed on the ground that they have perfected their rights as sirdar on the basis of long possession and the name of the petitioners is wrongly recorded and is liable to be expunged. The claim was contested by the petitioners on the ground that they were in possession of the land in dispute since the time of their ancestor and their father be-came Adhivasi and thereafter sirdar. It was further pleaded that the father of the petitioners was declared Adhivasi under the provisions of the U. P. Z. A. and L. R. Act and the compensation was received by respondent Nos. 2 to 4 and since no objection was filed by them under Section 240 (G) of the U. P. Z. A. and L. R. Act, their claim of Sirdari is barred.

3. It is undisputed that the father of the petitioners had filed s












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