Back
RAJNISH KUMAR
Divisional Forest Officer North Kheri – Appellant
Versus
Surjan Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Vimal Srivastava, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri S.K. Khare, learned Standing Counsel for the appellant and Sri Satendra Nath Rai, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. This second appeal, under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code(hereinafter referred to as CPC), has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 16.04.1982 passed by the 1st Additional District Judge Kheri in Civil Appeal No.152/1980, by means of which the appeal has been dismissed upholding the judgment and decree dated 09.09.1980 passed by the VIth Additional Munsif, Lakhimpur Kheri in Regular Suit No.154/1977(Surjan Singh & 3 Ors. Versus Divisional Forest Officer, North Kheri).
3. The following substantial questions of law have been formulated in this appeal:-
(b) Whether the suit of the plaintiff for permanent injunction was maintainable especially when the notification under Sections 4 and 20 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 was issued in the year 1966 and 1970 respectively?
(c)
The main legal point established in the judgment is the power of the State Government to reserve forest land or wasteland under Section 3 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, and the consequences of vesti....
The court reaffirmed that the notification under the Indian Forest Act validly vested land with the State, and the appellate authority exceeded its jurisdiction by setting aside unchallenged notifica....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the probative value of the Gazette Notification under the Forest Act and the implications of the bar on entertaining suits during the notification ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the lack of jurisdiction of Consolidation Authorities over forest land notified under Section-4 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, and the vesting of ....
Enforceable rights under the Forest Rights Act require strict adherence to statutory procedures; mere possession without valid documentation cannot substantiate legal claims over forest land.
The court upheld the State's authority to declare land as reserved forest, emphasizing that tenure-holders cannot claim proprietary rights over such land post-abolition of Zamindari.
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
