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

Table of Content
1. introduction to case background and parties involved. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. arguments regarding ownership and tenant rights. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
3. court's observations about previous rulings impacting the case. (Para 18 , 19 , 20)
4. the court's ruling on the necessity of joint ownership recognition. (Para 25 , 26)

JUDGMENT:

2) The first two proceedings (Writ Petition Nos.1411/2014 and 1432/2014) are filed to challenge the orders made by the Tenancy Court and the appellate authorities like the order of the Tahsildar Paithan dated 30-11-2009, the order of the appellate authority, Sub Divisional Officer given in Appeal No.3/2011 and the order of the revisional authority – M.R.T. (Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Aurangabad) in Revision No.61-B-2012. The Tahsildar, Tenancy Court, has given direction to issue ownership certificate under the provision of Section 38(6) of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) in favour respondent No.1 Pandharinath Borude (now deceased and represented by his legal representatives). It is the case of the petitioners of the present two petitions who are brothers of Pandharinath that all the brot

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