SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(All) 3227

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
CHANDRA KUMAR RAI
Deepak Madhok – Appellant
Versus
Board of Revenue – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Ashish Kumar Singh, Ajay Kumar Singh

JUDGMENT :

CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J.

1. Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Abhishek Kumar Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

2. Brief facts of the case are that property in question was recorded in the name of Smt. Saranga Devi, Ranjeet, Sanjeet, Jagjeet and Smt. Jamuna Devi. Smt. Saranga Devi and others transferred their 1/2 share of the property in question in favour of Dr. Amrit Lal Ishrat (father of petitioner no.1) and Smt. Bharti Madhok (petitioner no.2) through registered sale deed dated 23.6.1988. Smt. Jamuna Devi executed an agreement to sale in respect to her 1/2 share in favour of Smt. D-Ishrat. The proceedings under Section 122 -B of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as "U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act") was initiated against Smt. Bharti Madhok and others which was decided vide order dated 11.3.1991 for ejectment and damages. Petitioner no.2/ Bharti Madhok filed revision against the order dated 11.3.1991 which was admitted but no interim order was granted, accordingly, writ petition was filed before this Court which was disposed of vide order dated 25.3.1991 direct

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top