Back
CHANDRA KUMAR RAI
Mobin – Appellant
Versus
State Government of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Chandra Kumar Rai, J
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Abhishek Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Mr. Kaushal Kishore Mani, learned counsel for the respondent- Gram Panchayat.
2. The instant petition has been filed for the following reliefs:
3. Learned counsel fo
The court determines that ongoing legal proceedings negate the need for interference in property mutation matters based on a Will-deed, emphasizing adherence to procedural integrity.
Transfer applications must be based on genuine grounds; repeated applications causing undue delay in proceedings are unjustified.
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.
Mutation proceedings under the U.P. Land Revenue Act do not confer title and are subject to civil suits for declaration of rights.
Delay in filing a mutation application raises doubts about its legitimacy, especially when previous claims have already been adjudicated and dismissed.
Mutation proceedings under the U.P. Land Revenue Act do not confer title and are subject to the outcome of civil suits regarding property rights.
Mutation proceedings are summary and do not confer title; title must be established in 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
