Back
VIVEK CHAUDHARY, MANISH KUMAR
Jashoda Beva Thakur – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. prayers made by petitioner for the security of land possession. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. the property in question was claimed under various acts, including the repealed one. (Para 3 , 4 , 6) |
| 3. court's final ruling favored the petitioner based on the absence of established facts by the state. (Para 25 , 26 , 27) |
JUDGMENT
Heard.
2. The present writ petition has been preferred with the following main prayers:-
The vesting of land under a specific provision does not confer actual possession to the State unless it is proven that physical possession was taken or voluntarily surrendered.
Failure to issue mandatory notices under the Urban Land Act invalidates state claims of land possession, allowing petitioners to retain ownership rights based on ongoing lawful occupancy.
The court ruled that the State must provide evidence of actual possession for land recorded as surplus; mere vesting does not confer ownership rights post-repeal without taking possession.
The court held that statutory compliance under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act is mandatory for valid dispossession, emphasizing that mere vesting does not equate to possession.
The court ruled that actual physical possession must be established for the State to validly claim ownership under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, and procedural requirements for n....
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
