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

RAM SURAT RAM (MAURYA)
Duryodhan – Appellant
Versus
Collector/D. D. C. Basti – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioners:H.D. Verma, Advocate
For the Respondents: C.S.C., Jokhan Prasad

JUDGMENT

Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J.—Heard Sri R.N.S. Yaday and Sri H.D. Verma, for the petitioners and Sri Jokhan Prasad, for respondent-2. With the consent of the parties writ petition is decided finally.

2. The writ petition has been filed against the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 23.01.2015 allowing the revision of respondent-2 and setting aside the order of Consolidation Officer dated 10.09.2013, by which amendment application filed by the petitioners for amending their written statement was allowed in title proceeding under U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

3. The dispute relates to basic consolidation year khata 14 of village Paraspur alias Dubauli, tappa Ganeshpur, pargana Nagar Purab, district Basti. In basic consolidation year, khata in dispute was recorded in the names of the petitioners and respondent-2. Paltu (respondent-2) filed a time barred objection (registered as TB Case No. 78) under Section 9-A of the Act, for deleting the names of the petitioners from khata in dispute. The Consolidation Officer by order dated 22.12.2010 dismissed the objection of respondent-2 as time barred. Respondent-2 filed an appeal





























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