Back
SAURABH LAVANIA
Nandini Devi – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Director Of Consolidation Ayodhya – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri Hemant Pandey, learned State Counsel and Sri Krishna Kumar Dubey, learned Counsel for the side opposite.
2. By means of the present petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 05.09.2016 passed by opposite party no.2/Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Ayodhya (in short 'SOC') passed in Appeal No. 797/1866/1737 (Rajeshwari Devi Versus Nandini Devi), as also the order dated 05.04.2019 passed by opposite party no.1/Deputy Director of Consolidation, District Ayodhya (in short 'DDC') in Revision No. 859 (Nandini Devi Versus Rajeshwari Devi).
3. Brief facts of the case, are to the effect that the land in dispute i.e. Gata No. 76 (new number 66) situated at Village-Moradabad, Tehsil-Rudauli, District-Faizabad now Ayodhya, was recorded in the name of one Bhagwan Bux Singh. The Bhagwan Bux Singh expired on 04.12.1991, thereafter the name of his wife namely Rajeshwari Devi (opposite party no.3) was recorded in the revenue records in terms of Section 171 of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950 (in short 'Act of 1950') as applicable at relevant point of time. Section 171 of the Act of 1950, applicable at relevant point of time reads as
The main legal point established is that rights recognized by statute could be settled through conciliation, and a compromise would not be valid if it violated the provisions of the U.P.C.H. Rules.
The Assistant Consolidation Officer cannot create new rights in land through compromise; only existing statutory rights can be recognized under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act.
A judgment obtained by fraud or collusion does not operate as res judicata and is not binding on the parties to the proceedings. Such a judgment can be avoided in subsequent proceedings by a party ab....
A compromise regarding property transfer is invalid if procured through fraud and lacks necessary documentation and registration.
The court ruled that title objections under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act must be decided on merit, emphasizing the need for proper jurisdiction and evidence rather than relying on alleged c....
The judgment established that prior adjudications regarding land rights under the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act can operate as res judicata in subsequent consolidation proceedings, reinforcing the finality of ....
Orders and titles obtained through fraud are nullities; rightful ownership should not be barred by procedural delays attributable to such fraud.
Tenure Land - Once a dispute was recorded by Assistant Consolidation Officer and on objection being filed same was referred to Consolidation Officer, it is incumbent to Consolidation Officer to decid....
The court established that property was self-acquired, not ancestral, and rejected claims of adverse possession and family settlement due to lack of evidence.
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
