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

2021 Supreme(MP) 115

SANJAY DWIVEDI
Munni Bai – Appellant
Versus
Ramdayal – Respondent


Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Shobhitaditya and Nirmala Nayak, Advocates
For the Respondent:Shobhitaditya, Nirmala Nayak and K.S. Jha, Advocates

JUDGMENT :

Sanjay Dwivedi, J.

1. Since in the both these petitions the parties are same as also impugned order dated 27.08.2020 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Bhopal Division, Bhopal has been assailed, therefore, they are being decided concomitantly. For the purpose of convenience, facts of M.P. No. 2462/2020 are being taken up for consideration.

2. These petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India have been filed assailing the order dated 27.08.2020 (Annexure-P/7) passed by the Additional Commissioner, Bhopal Division, Bhopal, whereby the said Authority by setting aside the order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Bhopal, has allowed the appeal preferred by respondent Nos. 1 to 4.

3. To resolve the controversy involved in the case, necessary facts adumbrated in a nutshell are that:-

    The petitioner, respondent No. 1 and respondent Nos. 5 to 7 are sisters and brother. The property in question measuring 4.950 hectares (12.23 acres) previously recorded in the name of late Nandram, the father of the petitioner, respondent No. 1 and respondent Nos. 5 to 7. Thereafter, the land has been allocated in new khasra number i.e. khasra Nos. 54/2, 167/1, 55, 56, 44, 38/1, 38/4

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