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

2013 Supreme(All) 2724

RAM SURAT RAM (MAURYA)
JHANDU – Appellant
Versus
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
R.S. Tripathi and A.P. Tiwari for the Petitioner; C.S.C. for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J.—Heard Sri A.P. Tiwari, for the petitioner.

2. The writ petition has been filed against the orders of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 9.10.2013 and Consolidation Officer dated 3.5.2010, passed in proceedings under Section 12 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

3. The dispute relates to the land of chaks 320, 748 and 1177 of village Kurhashahpur, pargana Ujhani, district Budaun. Chaks 320 and 748 were recorded, in the name of Mohkam son of Nekram and Chak 1177 was recorded in the name of Sipattar. The petitioner filed an objection (registered as Case No. 5 of 2009-10) under Section 12 of the Act, for recording his name as an heir of Mohkam and Sipattar, the recorded tenure holders. It has been stated by the petitioner that Mohkam was his real brother and Sipattar was his real uncle (father’s brother). Both of them died issue less. The petitioner was their nearest heir under Section 171 of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951. Thereafter, Mithlesh Babu (respondent-3) also filed an objection under Section 12 of the Act, for recording his name as an heir of Mohkam. It has been stated by respondent-3 that h













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