JASPREET SINGH
Mohd. Ameen – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Director of Consolidation Bahraich/Shrawasti – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
JASPREET SINGH, J.
1. The dispute relates to eleven plots comprising of Gata No. 64, situate in Village Rajapur Virpur, District Shrawasti which originally belonged to Shri Ori son of Baccha. On his death, the said property devolved on his four sons namely Chunni, Asha Ram, Putti Ram and Shree Ram. Insofar as the instant petition is concerned, the dispute is confined to 1/4 share in Gata No. 64 which devolved on Chunni son of Ori.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that Chunni was perpetually sick, hence, he required money for his treatment. Accordingly, the petitioner had lend Rs.70,000/- to Chunni and his son Vikram. It is also the case that Chunni had agreed to sell the property i.e. his 1/4 share in Gata No. 64 to the petitioner in lieu of Rs.70,000/- advanced to him. Since, Chunni died and he was survived only by his son Vikram, hence, Vikram had also agreed to transfer the property to the petitioner, however, the same could not be done and in the meantime the village in question came under consolidation operations.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that he filed his objections under Section 9-A(2) of the U.P. Consolidation and Holdings Act, 1953 (for short ‘the Act
Bhoop Singh v. Ram Singh Major
Bhagwan Das Chela Balram Das v. District Magistrate, Ambedkarnagar and Others
A compromise regarding property transfer is invalid if procured through fraud and lacks necessary documentation and registration.
A judgment obtained by fraud or collusion does not operate as res judicata and is not binding on the parties to the proceedings. Such a judgment can be avoided in subsequent proceedings by a party ab....
Validity of recorded ownership requires substantiation through evidence, especially regarding compromises and claims made in revenue records under consolidation proceedings.
Point of Law : A compromise having been filed before the Consolidation Officer, was not verified in terms of Rule 25A of the Rules of 1954, where it has been specifically provided that the Assistant ....
The court affirmed that previously established compromises governed property rights, and the misrepresentation of record by defendants did not substantiate their claims to a larger share than legally....
The court affirmed that the rights of co-tenants may be limited by previous compromises, reinforcing the principle that parties must substantiate claims against duly recorded documents.
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 held that succession rights require substantiated proof of parentage, emphasizing the need for reliable documentation in inheritance claims under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act.
Orders and titles obtained through fraud are nullities; rightful ownership should not be barred by procedural delays attributable to such fraud.
The court established that property was self-acquired, not ancestral, and rejected claims of adverse possession and family settlement due to lack of evidence.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.