Back
SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
Khaza Begum, died – Appellant
Versus
Toopu Venkat Reddy, died – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The present Writ Petition is arising out of order dated 07.08.2004 passed by respondent No.5/Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad, in a revision filed by the petitioners under Section 15(2) of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Record of Rights in Lands Regulation, 1358-Fasli.
2. The petitioners have preferred the aforesaid revision for correction of revenue entries in the Khasra Pahani for the year 1954-55 onwards stating that the names of the respondents were wrongly recorded. However, the revision was preferred after a delay of 43 years.
3. The respondents before the Joint Collector came up with a categoric case that they have submitted an application under the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Record of Rights in Land Regulation, 1358-F; as they were in possession of the land, their names were mutated in the revenue records; and since 1952-53 till date, they have been in possession of the land as protected tenants. The Joint Collector has dismissed the revision as it was preferred after a lapse of 43 years.
4. The petitioners have not been able to make out a case of fraud for condoning the huge delay of 43 years in preferring the revision. The petitioners want
The court ruled that delayed administrative actions undermining property rights must be resolved through civil courts, emphasizing the importance of timely legal recourse.
State's delayed challenge to the land grant lacks merit as no substantiating evidence was presented, affirming the integrity of rights established over decades.
The revisional jurisdiction under Section 9 of the ROR Act cannot be exercised after a long delay, and the settled rights of a person under the ROR Act cannot be unsettled after a lapse of more than ....
The court emphasized the necessity of following due process and issuing notice to affected parties in revenue record alterations, affirming the principles of natural justice.
The exercise of revisional power under the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act after a significant delay is improper and violates principles of natural justice.
A land title claim cannot be raised after a significant delay; jurisdiction lies with the Civil Court for disputed ownership.
The court affirmed that a revision petition under the ROR Act can be filed without a time limit, emphasizing the need for a fresh enquiry into land ownership claims, especially in cases of alleged fr....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
