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

1972 Supreme(All) 478

A. K. KIRTY, S. N. DWIVEDI
Abdul Junaid – Appellant
Versus
Dy. Director of Consolidation and Ors – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
K.B. Verma, Advocate, For the Appellant / Fauzdar Rai, Advocate and S.C, For the Respondent

JUDGMENT

S.N. Dwivedi, J. - The Petitioner has filed the writ petition against the order of the Dy. DC dismissing his revision summarily. The revision was filed Under Section 48 of the Consolidation of Holdings Act. It was filed against the order of the SOC dated March 18, 1964. It was filed on May 16, 1964.

2. Rule 111 of the Consolidation of Holdings Rules is framed Under Section 54 of the Consolidation of Holdings Act. Before March 25, 1964 it read: "An application Under Section 48 of the Act shall be drawn up and presented by the Applicant or his pleader to the Director or to such other officer as he may appoint on his behalf. It shall be accompanied by a copy of the decree or the order in respect of which the application is made and by a copy of judgment, if any, upon which the decree or the order is founded. Copies of decrees or orders or judgments of other subordinate authorities shall not be required to be filed unless, for special reasons, filing of these documents is also considered necessary by the Director." That rule has stood for long. Presumably in the belief that that rule was still operating on May 16, 1964, the Petitioner filed along with the memorandum of revision

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