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

2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 36523

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT JABALPUR

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL

ON THE 1st OF APRIL, 2024

MISC. PETITION No. 1191 of 2024

BETWEEN:-

CHANDRAPAL LODH S/O RAMSWAROOP LODH, AGED

ABOUT

39

YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST

VILLAGE

KHOURA

TEHSIL

AJAYGARH

TEHSIL

AJAYGARH

DISTRICT

PANNA (M.P.)

(MADHYA

PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER

(BY SHRI DINESH SINGH BANAFAR - ADVOCATE)

AND

1.

RAJA S/O BHAGWAT PRASAD LODH, AGED

ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NOT MENTION

VILLAGE KHOURA TEHSIL AJAYGARH DISTRICT

PANNA (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.

3.

4.

5.

DHARAMPAL S/O BHAGWAT PRASAD LODH,

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE KHOURA,

TEHSIL AJAYGARH DISTRICT PANNA (MADHYA

PRADESH)

ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER SAGAR DIVISION

SAGAR (M.P.)

SUB

DIVISIONAL

OFFICER

(REVENUE),

AJAYGARH, PANNA DISTRICT PANNA (M.P.)

NAYAB

TEHSILDAR,

MANDAL

DHARAMPUR,

TEHSIL AJAYGARH DISTRICT PANNA (M.P.)

.....RESPONDENTS

(SHRI DARSHAN SONI - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR THE STATE)

This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the

following:

Advocates:
Dinesh Singh Banafar,

ORDER

This Miscellaneous Petition is filed being aggrieved of order dated 18/09/2023 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Sagar Division Sagar in Case No. 0739/appeal/A-70/22-23 whereby second appeal filed on behalf of Chandrapal Lodh who is the present petitioner under Section 44 (2) of the M.P. Land Revenue Code being aggrieved of the orders of the Sub Divisional Officer, Ajaygarh in Case No. 0026/appeal-2022-23 dated 29/11/2022 has been rejected.

Petitioner's contention is that petitioner had received part of the land contained in Survey No. 2195/1/3 and, therefore, they have moved an application under Section 178 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code for demarcation. Order of demarcation is available on record as Annexure P-10. In the Seemankan Panchnama, it is mentioned that the land was in possession of Raja Dharampal S/o Bhagwat Prasad on the basis of ancestral possession.

There is no finding of encroachment in the hands of Raja Dharampal or anybody else on the suit land contained in Survey No. 2195/1/1 measuring

0.186 hectares and taking these facts into consideration, then no encroachment was found, then the authorities were justified in dismissing the application under Section 250 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code and the appeals originating from that order.

Thus, there being no illegality in the said order, the Miscellaneous Petition fails and is dismissed.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE vy

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 Back to top