Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY
Bachchu Lal – Appellant
Versus
D.D.C. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of objections under up consolidation act. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. arguments on validity of 1348 fasli entries. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. court's recognition of concurrent findings. (Para 11 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. application of estoppel and substantive evidences. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. dismissal of writ petitions with acknowledgment of delay. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
JUDGMENT :
Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.
1. Heard Sri N.C. Rajvanshi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Anil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Siddharth Nandan, learned counsel for the respondent no.4 and Sri R.K. Tiwari, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.
2. All the above referred writ petitions are arising out of seven objections filed under Section 9 -A (2) of Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter called the ‘Act of 1953’).
3. Three objections filed by Guru Dayal were based on his claim on basis of unauthorised possession (Unadhikar Kabza). The Consolidation Officer rejected his claim by a reasoned order that his possession could be considered only upto 4-5 years, which could not be sufficient to allow his claim. The said finding wa
Entries recorded under the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act possess a presumption of correctness and cannot be disturbed without substantial evidence, reaffirming the principle of estoppel....
The Revisional Authority must adequately consider all grounds in disputes regarding land possession under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act.
Claims regarding land share must be substantiated by proper procedural evidence; entries in consolidation forms alone do not establish finality in disputes.
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.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the effect of a preliminary decree for partition and the issue of survivorship in the case of the death of a co-owner.
Petitioners' failure to timely assert their land rights bars their claim under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953.
Legal proceedings initiated after the issuance of consolidation notifications are invalid under the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, as outlined in Section 5(2), and proper filing o....
The principle of res judicata and the requirement to challenge the initial order before filing a subsequent appeal were central to the court's decision.
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
