Back
SAURABH LAVANIA
Rati Pal – Appellant
Versus
Dy. Director of Consolidation – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Saurabh Lavania, J.
Rejoinder affidavit filed today, is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri. Jai Shanker Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. Hemant Kumar Pandey, learned State Counsel and Sri. P.V.Chaudhary, learned counsel for the opposite party.
3. Earlier in the present petition, an application for recall was allowed by this Court vide order dated 08.03.2018, whereby the final order 07.05.1982 was recalled. The order dated 08.03.2018 reads as under:-
The court ruled that a party's knowledge of an order and failure to justify significant delays in appeals precludes the recall of orders passed on merits.
The Deputy Director of Consolidation must adhere to remand orders and consider all relevant records and admissions before making decisions regarding co-tenancy rights.
Authorities must provide adequate opportunity for parties to present their case; decisions made in haste without hearing can lead to prejudice.
Relief not sought in specific terms cannot be granted, emphasizing the necessity of proper pleadings in legal proceedings.
The Deputy Director of Consolidation's remand for a fresh hearing was justified to ensure fairness, given the significant delay and procedural irregularities in prior decisions.
Rights in land cannot be conferred through compromises without establishing ancestral property status, rendering such agreements unlawful.
A party must demonstrate substantive rights to challenge consolidation orders; inordinate delay in seeking restoration applications without sufficient explanation cannot be condoned.
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
