Back
SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY
Fazlur Rahman – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Director of Consolidation – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.
Facts of the present case, in brief, are that, initially plots in dispute were mentioned in revenue record as "submerged land". Contesting- respondents herein initiated proceedings when village was brought under consolidation and claimed right of sole ownership. The dispute reached up to Revisional Authority and land in dispute was recorded in the name of contesting-respondents. Other proceedings were also concluded in their favour and admittedly at that stage petitioners have neither made any claim on land in dispute nor participated in these proceedings.
2. At later stage, petitioners have filed objections under Section 9A(2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereafter referred to as "Act, 1953") with an application for condonation of delay. Delay was condoned and it was deemed that objections were filed under under Section 9A of Act, 1953. The Consolidation Officer has framed following two issues:
3. Consolidation Officer after considering rival submissions rejected objections filed by the petitioners and rejected their claim of co-tenancy vide order dated 24.07.1972. Relevant part of order is extracted hereinbelow:
(Emphasis supplie
Petitioners' failure to timely assert their land rights bars their claim under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953.
The Revisional Authority must provide sound reasoning when reversing lower court findings; mere admissions without corroborating evidence are insufficient to establish claims of ownership.
Dismissal of prior suit for maintainability does not determine current rights, and failure to consider evidence results in perverse findings necessitating remand for proper adjudication.
Tenure Land - Once a dispute was recorded by Assistant Consolidation Officer and on objection being filed same was referred to Consolidation Officer, it is incumbent to Consolidation Officer to decid....
Orders and titles obtained through fraud are nullities; rightful ownership should not be barred by procedural delays attributable to such fraud.
Court upheld findings of lower authorities stating that the inability to prove family partition and validity of respondents' title under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act prevailed, e....
Reliance solely on historical land ownership entries without supporting evidence from parties can lead to erroneous conclusions, requiring a reevaluation of claims based on tangible evidence.
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
