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

1990 Supreme(MP) 143

T.N.SINGH, S.K.DUBEY
Imrat – Appellant
Versus
Lanjua – Respondent


Advocates:
J.P. Gupta, Counsel as Amicus Curiae; K.K. Lahoti for petitioner; H.D. Gupta, Government Advocate for State.

ORDER

Dr. T.N. Singh, J. -- 1. The occasion for this reference arose on petitioner's counsel citing two Bench decisions of this Court and placing implicit reliance thereon when the matter came before two of us sitting in a Division Bench. He contended that interpretation therein of the relevant statutory provisions was binding on us and the law therein laid down was based on valid and sound propositions. That position being disputed and finding apparent merit in the challenge to the views taken in the decisions cited, this reference was made.

2. It is not necessary to deal or decide any fact except to outline briefly petitioner's case. Respondent No. 1 had executed a registered sale-deed in his favour on 30.12.1978 in respect of an area of 3.125 hectares of agricultural land for a consideration of Rs.2,000/-. Out of that amount Rs.200/- had been paid earlier and Rs.1,800/- was paid at the time of registration. Petitioners got possession of that land and had been cultivating the same. On 11.4.1984, the said respondent moved an application under M.P. Samaj Ke Kamjor Vargon Ke Krishi Bhumidharakon Ka Udhar Dene Walon Ke Bhumi Hadapane Sambandhi Kuchakron Se Paritran Tatha Mukti Adhini





































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