Back
SAURABH LAVANIA
Ram Prasad – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Saurabh Lavania, J.
Heard.
2. Present petition has been filed for the following main reliefs:-
3. It is submitted that the order dated 26.03.2018 was passed by the respondent No.4-Sub Divisional Magistrate/Joint Magistrate, Sadar, Lucknow and the order dated 28.12.2022 was pass
The court emphasized the necessity of providing a fair opportunity to be heard before passing orders affecting rights, reinforcing principles of natural justice.
Eviction upheld for illegal possession of public land, but damages quashed due to lack of justification and procedural errors by the appellate authority.
A partition suit under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code is not maintainable if the petitioner is the sole recorded owner of the land.
The court ruled that orders affecting rights must not be made without providing notice and opportunity to the affected party, emphasizing the principles of natural justice.
The failure to notify a necessary party in land demarcation proceedings violates the principles of natural justice, necessitating a fresh examination of the case.
The absence of a hearing does not invalidate administrative orders if compelling evidence supports the decision, emphasizing that not all violations of natural justice lead to nullification.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the first appeal under Section 207 of the U.P. Revenue Code-2006 cannot be filed against an order passed under Section 24, and the appeal can ....
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
