Back
CHANDRA KUMAR RAI
Gulam Mursaleen – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Chandra Kumar Rai, J.
Heard Mr. Iqbal Ahmad, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. B.D. Mishra, learned counsel for respondent nos. 6 to 10, Mr. Mahesh Narayan Mishra, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the state-respondents and Mr. Siraj Hamad Khan, learned counsel for respondent nos. 13 & 14.
2. Brief facts of the case are that dispute relate to succession of one Mahmudul Hasan who expired on 29.10.2017. Respondent nos. 6 & 7 filed an application under Sections 34/35 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 before the Tehsildar, Sirathu, District Kaushambi for recording of their names on the basis of succession. Respondent no.4/Naib Tehsildar vide order dated 14.8.2018, allowed the application filed by respondent nos. 6 & 7 and directed to record the names of respondent nos. 6 & 7 along with Smt. Sarvat Ara, wife of Mahmudul Hasan (petitioner's father), expunging the name of Mahmudul Hasan from the plots of khata nos.191, 192, 189, 188, 176, 1270, 742, 663, 662, 661, 660, 659, 658, 657, 655, 656, 748, 612 and 769 situated in village Sirathu, Pargana Kada, Tehsil Sirathu, District Kaushambi. Against the order of Tehsildar dated 14.8.2018, petitioner filed an appeal before the S.D.O. which wa
The court affirmed the Board of Revenue's decision, ruling that the Naib Tehsildar acted within jurisdiction and the petitioner's claims were dismissed due to lack of grounds for recall.
The mutation application based on an unchallenged sale deed cannot be dismissed in summary proceedings, affirming the Board of Revenue's review authority under the U.P. Land Revenue Act.
The Board of Revenue must provide adequate reasoning in its orders; a cryptic order is unsustainable in law.
Writ petitions against mutation orders are maintainable if they violate natural justice or are issued without jurisdiction, reaffirming the need for proper procedural adherence in land revenue matter....
Mutation proceedings - There is no finding recorded either by Appellate Court or by Revisional Court as to who was in actual possession of property in question and therefore liable to pay revenue to ....
Delay in filing a mutation application raises doubts about its legitimacy, especially when previous claims have already been adjudicated and dismissed.
The court emphasized that mutation proceedings must adhere to legal principles and fair hearing, setting aside arbitrary decisions made by lower authorities.
Summary proceedings under the U.P. Revenue Code cannot adjudicate title disputes; petitioners may seek declaration of rights through a regular suit.
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
