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

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT PRINCIPAL SEAT JODHPUR
PURAN RAM – Appellant
Versus
B.O.R. and ORS – Respondent


Advocates:
['GR PUNIA', '', 'RS CHOUDHARY', 'RD POTALIA', 'JR CHAWEL']

09

S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3229/2004

Date of Order

:

06-08-2004

HON'BLE MR. N.P.GUPTA,J.

Mr.R.S.Choudhary, for the petitioner.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Perusal of Annex.9, shows that

Tehsildar was intimated about the appointment of Receiver over Khasra No.86

and 87/224, total 31 bighas 15 biswas vide order dated 8.11.2001. Then from

Annex.10, it appears that Tehsildar addressed some communication on

16.11.2001 pointing out "माम मेहराणा के .नं. 87/224 भूिम तरमीम शुदा

नहं तथा जैन याऊ भूिम के कजे के बारे जानकार नहं हईु "

whereupon the SDO conveyed to Tehsildar that location of land be identified, by

recording the statement of neighbours, a direction was also given to hold a

detailed inquiry. Thereafter the Tehsildar appears to have held an inquiry by

recording evidence, and has taken possession of land, on which Receiver was

appointed. As appears from Annex.11, and specially para 5, that according to

present petitioner, Jain Pyau has given wrong statement before the Subordinate

Court, and by misleading that authority, got the land attached exparte. Look at

these averments, does show that Tehsildar did make inquiry, and did record so

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