Back
CHANDRA KUMAR RAI
Vidyawati – Appellant
Versus
Board of Revenue U. P. At Allahabad – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. Achal Singh Vats, learned counsel for the petitioner, leaned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Mr. Azad Rai, learned counsel for respondent No.3.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed for quashing the judgment and order dated 15.04.2005 and 30.03.2005 passed by respondent No.1 i.e. Board of Revenue, U.P. Allahabad and order dated 30.01.2001 passed by Up Ziladhikari, Phoolpur, Allahabad.
3. Brief facts of the case are that petitioner belongs to scheduled caste community, her father was in possession of plot No.78 area 0.401 hectares and plot No.79-Ka area 0.009 hectare situated in village Bagautipur @ Khuthana, Pargana and Tehsil-Soraon, District-Allahabad. Petitioner's father died leaving behind his widow Smt. Sundari Devi as his legal heir and after death of Sundari Devi, land in dispute duly devolved upon the petitioner being her daughter. Smt. Sundari Devi had also executed a registered will in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, petitioner is continuing in actual possession of land in dispute. Petitioner filed a Suit under Section 229-B/122-B (4F) of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act impleading the Gram Panchayat and State of U.P. as defendants. Th
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the second appellate court's decision must address the facts of the case, condone any procedural delays, and ensure that appeals are filed by ....
The court established that there is no limitation for filing a suit under Section 229-B of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, affirming the petitioners' continuous possession and rights over the disputed lan....
Co-sharers must prove joint acquisition to claim rights in property; appeals filed after significant delays are not maintainable.
The authority's order beyond jurisdiction is void; the previous order remains intact while directing a merits-based decision on the pending application.
The court affirmed the entitlement of the petitioner to Bhumidhar rights under the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, emphasizing the importance of recognizing statutory protections for marginalized community memb....
The court affirmed that the trial court's decree granting bhumidhari rights was valid, and the Board of Revenue acted within its jurisdiction in upholding this decision.
Parties not involved in a second appeal lack standing to challenge the Board of Revenue's decision regarding land ownership.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
