Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
CHANDRA KUMAR RAI
Afsar Ali Khan – Appellant
Versus
Liyakat Khan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Chandra Kumar Rai, J.
1. Heard Sri Hari Manish Bahadur Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri E.A. Khan, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 7, Sri Syed Mohd. Khalid, learned counsel for respondent No. 5, Sri Shivaji Singh Sisodiya, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 11, 12, 20 & 21, Sri B.N. Pathak, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and perused the record.
2. Brief facts of the case are that against the basic year entry of plot of Khata No. 206 Situated in village-Thiria Nijawat Khan, Pergana, Tehasil & District Bareilly as well as plot of Khata No. 464 recorded in C.H. Form-45, three sets of objection were filed. First Set of objection was filed by Shafi Raza Khan & others, second set of objection was filed by custodian enemy property and third set of objection was filed by Abdul Wahid Khan. Consolidation Officer vide order dated 16.09.2015 dismissed the objection of respondent No. 1 and divided the share giving 1/32 share to petitioners and 1/2 share was ordered to be recorded as custodian property. Against the order of Consolidation Officer dated 16.09.2015 appeals under Section 11 (1) of Uttar Pradesh Consolidation and Holdings Act, he
The Deputy Director of Consolidation has the authority to decide appeals on their merits rather than remanding to subordinate authorities, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive review under Sectio....
The Deputy Director of Consolidation must decide on merits when sufficient evidence is available, and parties must be afforded a fair hearing before any decision.
The Deputy Director of Consolidation's remand for a fresh hearing was justified to ensure fairness, given the significant delay and procedural irregularities in prior decisions.
Revisions involving the same parties and disputes must be consolidated for efficient resolution under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act.
The Deputy Director of Consolidation has the authority to decide revisions based on existing evidence and should not remand cases unnecessarily.
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....
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
