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

1959 Supreme(MP) 327

P.V.DIXIT, N.M.GOLVALKER
KASHIPRASAD BEHARILAL SHUKLA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
H.L.KHASKALAM, R.K.Pandey

DIXIT, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by a person, who, on 17th February 1950, entered into an agreement for working certain areas in the Malguzari forest of Goura, Basera, Gouri, Mahgaon and Bhandra in Sehora Tehsil with the then proprietor thereof, Raja Harbhagat Singh. On the coming into force of the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Rights (Estates, Mahals Alienated Lands) Act, 1950, the agreement ceased to be operative as against the State. The petitioner's case is that after the enactment of the said Act he approached the State Government for recognizing his licence to work the forest areas as per the agreement concluded between him and Raja Harbhagat Singh on 17th February 1950; that on 5th January 1956 the State Government addressed him a letter saying that they had sanctioned the recognition of the forest lease granted in his favour by Raja Harbhagat Singh; and that "thereafter he approached the forest authorities for the marking of the tress in the forest area as stated in the letter of the Government conveying the sanction of the recognition of the lease, but that the forest authorities failed to do so and later on






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