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) 20258

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL, J
Jageshwar Singh – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent


Advocates:
Sonal Patel,Advocate General

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - The petition was dismissed; the Collector's order directing recording of names on the property was upheld due to lack of partition evidence. (!) - There is no document on record showing partition among the three brothers, undermining claims to regain property. (!) - The case centers on whether there was a valid partition; absence of partition documentation leads to upholding the Collector's order. (!) - The order directed Tahsildar to record names of petitioner and his brothers and the respondent on the property. (!) - The petition argues the father partitioned property among three sons, but no supporting partition document was produced. (!) - The court emphasizes the need for documentation to validate partition claims against seniors' right to live with dignity. (!) - The final outcome: Petition dismissed; no interference with the Collector's order. (!)

What is the main issue regarding reclaiming property after a purported partition?

What is the court's stance on the absence of documentation evidencing partition between the brothers?

What are the rights of senior citizens to live with dignity in relation to property partition disputes?


ORDER

Petitioner-Jageshwar Singh who happens to be the son of Shri Ranjeet Singh has filed this petition being aggrieved of order dated 19/07/2022 passed by Collector, Jabalpur in Case No.0013/Appeal/2020-21 (Annexure-P/3) whereby present petitioner has been directed not to cause damage to the right of the senior citizens to live with dignity and it is further held that the report in this regard shall be furnished by the concerned Tahsildar.

2. At this stage, Shri Bharat Deep Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, appears and submits that after petitioner's father i.e. respondent had partitioned the property amongst his three sons, now he is trying to take back the property of the present petitioner.

3. From para-6 (a) of the order passed by the Collector, it is apparent that Collector directed the Tahsildar Shahpura to record names of petitioner along with his two brothers and the respondent on the property situated at Survey No.134/1/5 measuring area 0.1200 hectare and Survey No.135/1 measuring area 1.080 hectare. When this Court wanted to know from Shri Bharat Deep Singh Vedi, learned counsel as to where is the document showing partition had taken place between the three brothe

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