Back
SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY
Rajdev – Appellant
Versus
D. D. C. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. dispute regarding land ownership under the act, 1953. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. issues of evidence and claims evaluation. (Para 3 , 14) |
| 3. findings of settlement officer and revisional authority on land status. (Para 4 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. arguments presented by both sides regarding land ownership. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 5. court's application of reason against findings. (Para 9) |
| 6. error in upholding basic year entry despite parties failing to establish claims. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 7. writ petition allowed in part; matter remitted for fresh order. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
JUDGMENT
Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.
This case is arising out of a proceeding under U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (for short "Act, 1953") in respect of a dispute regarding plot no. 941, khata no. 110 situated in village Agraha, Tehsil Badlapur, District Jaunpur.
2. It is not in dispute that in basic year, name of Ram Chandra s/o Ajudhia i.e. original respondent no.4 was recorded. The original petitioner before this Court had filed an objection under Section 9 of the Act, 1953 claiming to be co-sharer of land in dispute to extent of 1/3. Another objection was filed by one Ratipal Singh and others, claiming to be owners o
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.
The court reaffirmed that mere revenue entries do not suffice to establish adverse possession, which requires demonstrable continuity, publicity, and intent to possess as owner, thus justifying the i....
The Revisional Authority must provide sound reasoning when reversing lower court findings; mere admissions without corroborating evidence are insufficient to establish claims of ownership.
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....
The court ruled that title objections under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act must be decided on merit, emphasizing the need for proper jurisdiction and evidence rather than relying on alleged c....
Point Of Law: It is important to appreciate the question of intention as it would have appeared to the paper-owner. The issue is that intention of the adverse user gets communicated to the paper owne....
A claim of adverse possession must demonstrate clear, hostile, and continuous possession for over 12 years, supported by genuine records; incorrect or surreptitious entries do not confer any rights.
Rejecting title of on trees and boring well - land in dispute belongs to Gram Samaj therefore even if the orders passed by the lower authorities were not sustainable and quashed, no fruitful purpose ....
Petitioners' failure to timely assert their land rights bars their claim under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953.
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
