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

1967 Supreme(All) 328

LAKSHMI PRASAD
Inayat Ali – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
B.K. Srivastava, Advocate, for the Petitioner; Standing Counsel, for the Opposite parties

JUDGMENT

Lakshmi Prasad, J. - This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The disputed sirdari holding of the petitioner was sold for the realisation of certain dues of the Gaon Sabha realisable as arrears of land revenue as provided under Section 225 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, notwithstanding the petitioner's objection that his sirdari holding could not be sold for the realisation of such clues. Aggrieved by the order of the Sale Officer the petitioner went in appeal which was allowed. Then opposite party No. 1 went in revision before the Board of Revenue, opposite party No. 2. The said revision was allowed and the Board of Revenue took the view that it was permissible under the provisions of sub-sec. (2) of Section 286 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act to sell a sirdari holding for the realisation of sums of money recoverable as land revenue. It is in these circumstances that the present petition is filed with a prayer that the impugned order dated the 30th of May, 1966, passed by the Board of Revenue be quashed.

2. The petition is opposed by the opposite parties. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the

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