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

2023 Supreme(MP) 309

VIVEK RUSIA
Anubai – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Nitin Phadke for petitioners; Devaasheesh Dubey, Government Advocate for respondent No. 1/State; Pradyuman Kibe for respondents No. 4 and 5.

ORDER

1. As the controversy involved in all these petitions is identical, therefore, they are being decided by this common order. For the sake of convenience, the facts narrated in W.P.No.13204/2022 are being taken into consideration.

2. The private respondents approached the Tehsildar under section 129 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 seeking demarcation of boundaries of their land with an allegation that the present petitioners have encroached their land. The Tehsildar directed for demarcation through Revenue Inspector, who conducted the demarcation and submitted the report to the Tehsildar in favor of the petitioners. The Tehsildar under Sub-section (4) of section 129 of MPLRC has confirmed the said demarcation report.

3. After nine months, the respondents exercised their right of appeal under section 129 (5) of the MPLRC by filing an appeal before the SDO. The appeal was taken up on 3.9.2020 by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sendhwa and on very first date passed an order under section 129 (5) & (6) of the MPLRC for fresh demarcation. When the petitioners received the notice of the demarcation, they reached to the spot and thereafter submitted an objection before the SDO.

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