Back
YOGENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Ved Prakash – Appellant
Versus
State Of UP – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
YOGENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard Sri Akhilesh Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Abhishek Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the Staterespondents and Sri Kailash Nath Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no.4.
2. The present petition has been filed seeking to assail the order dated 30.01.2024 passed by respondent no.2, Additional Commissioner (Administration), Varanasi Division, Varanasi in Case No.2418 of 2023 (Computerized Case No.C202314000002481, Jay Prakash Vs. Om Prakash), under Section 207 of the UP Revenue Code, 2006[the Revenue Code], and also the earlier order dated 14.11.2023 passed by respondent no.3, SubDivisional Officer, Tehsil Pindra, District Varanasi, in Case No.14091 of 2021 (Computerized Case No.T202114700214091, Om Prakash Vs. Ved Prakash), under Section 116 of the Revenue Code.
3. Briefly stated facts of the case are as follows.
4. The petitioners claim to be cosharers of the respondent no.4 in land bearing arazi nos.466, 472, 475 and 459 situate at the village in question. A suit bearing Case No.861 of 2022 (Om Prakash Singh Vs. Ved Prakash and others), under Section 116 of the Code, was institu
Appellate courts must provide reasoned judgments addressing all grounds raised in appeals to ensure justice and proper application of law.
The preliminary decree under the U.P. Revenue Code is a final order determining the rights of parties, making it appealable despite being labeled interlocutory.
Point of law: It is a settled legal proposition that not only administrative but also judicial order must be supported by reasons, recorded in it. Thus, while deciding an issue, the court is bound to....
The court ruled that an appeal under Section 35(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code is subject to revision under Section 210, emphasizing the supervisory role of the Board or Commissioner over subor....
A revision under Section 210 of the UP Revenue Code is not maintainable unless the impugned order constitutes a 'suit or proceeding decided'.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the first appeal under Section 207 of the U.P. Revenue Code-2006 cannot be filed against an order passed under Section 24, and the appeal can ....
Objections to jurisdiction must be raised at the earliest opportunity, and failure to do so results in waiver; appeals under the UP Revenue Code must follow the prescribed procedures, and jurisdictio....
A partition suit under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code is not maintainable if the petitioner is the sole recorded owner of the land.
The court established that restoration proceedings under the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 are valid despite the enactment of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, emphasizing jurisdictional competence and subs....
The U.P. Revenue Code's provisions regarding appeals are self-contained and govern the necessity of filing documents, overriding general procedural requirements of the Code of Civil Procedure.
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
