S.AWASTHY, C.P.SEN
RAMLAKHAN – Appellant
Versus
PAMMA – Respondent
( 1 ) THE petitioner, in this petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution, is challenging the order of the Collector in appeal affirming the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer, allowing the respondent No. 1's application under S. 5 of the M. P. Samaj Ke Kamjor Vargon Ke Krishi Bhumi Hadapne Sambandhi Kuchakron Se Paritran Tatha Mukti Adhiniyam, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the (Act)) and setting aside the sale deed in favour of the petitioner executed by the respondent No. 1 as being a prohibited transaction of loan.
( 2 ) RESPONDENT No. 1 Pamma is a cultivator of village Satnur, Tahsil and District Chhindwara. By registered sale deed dated 26-5-1966, he and his wife Shyambati sold 8,11 acres with a house and well out of Khasra Nos. 110/1 and 111, total area 39. 85 acres, to the petitioner Ramlakhan for Rs. 12,500/ -. The lands are unirrigated. On the same day the petitioner executed an Ikrarnama agreeing to reconvey the land if the amount is repaid within one year. The land was duly mutated in the name of petitioner. On 4-4-1981, the respondent No. 1 filed an application under S. 5 of the Act before the Sub-Divisional Officer, alleging that it was a pro
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.