SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(All) 2231

DINESH PATHAK
Shabbir – Appellant
Versus
Dupty Director of Consolidation – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner: Zafeer Ahmad, Kamleshwar Singh.
For the Respondent: C.S.C., Arun Kumar Pandey.

JUDGMENT

Dinesh Pathak, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel representing respondents No. 1 & 7 and learned counsel for Gaon Sabha (respondent No. 6) on admission of the writ petition and perused the record on board.

2. Petitioner has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assailing the order dated 13.07.2021, passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation rejecting the restoration application moved on behalf of the petitioner against the order dated 13.09.2019 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation in Revision No. 12/22/47/85/121 and Revisions No. 13/33/48/86/122.

3. Facts culled out from the averment made in the writ petition are that the property in question basically belongs to one Nanhe. Present petitioner is claiming his right and title over the property in question on basis of unregistered will-deed dated 28.07.1993, however, contesting respondent No. 2 (Mangata) is claiming his right and title on the basis of succession being nephew of the recorded tenure holder Nanhe. Third claim was put forward by Smt. Shakuntla (respondent No. 4) on the basis of registered sale-deed dated

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top