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

1960 Supreme(MP) 391

K.L.PANDEY
Guruprasad Matadin Shukla – Appellant
Versus
Pritram Madhosingh – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: A.P. Sen and A.H. Saifi
For Respondents/Defendant: P.C. Patkak

JUDGMENT

K.L. Pandey, J.

This appeal by the plaintiff is directed against the reversing decree of the lower appeal Court by which his claim for possession of certain malik-makbuza plots specified in the plaint was dismissed.

Rani Mankunwarbai was the proprietor of Pandaria Zamindari. Pritram (defendant) held Patharra, a village in that Zamindari, as a thekadar with protected status. In that capacity, he was also in possession of 128.16 acres of home-farm land of the village. Under the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Rights (Estates, Mahals, Alienated Lands) Act, 1950 (hereinafter called the Act), the proprietary rights vested in the State with effect from 31st March 1951. Thereupon, by an order dated 3rd September 1951, the Deputy Commissioner, Land Reforms, Bilaspur, reserved to Pritram the rights of an occupancy tenant in 95.48 acres of the home-farm land. By the same order, the remaining home-farm land was reserved to Rani Mankunwarbai, who was treated as malik-makbuza of the land which was accordingly assessed to land revenue under section 42 of the Act.

It is no longer disputed, though it was contested in the Court of first instance, that, by a sale deed









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