Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
BABU vs LAXMAN - Madhya Pradesh
"].BABU vs LAXMAN - Madhya Pradesh
"].BABU vs LAXMAN - Madhya Pradesh
"].Courts have also noted that improper demarcation or failure to update maps with Batankan results in illegal or incorrect land bifurcations, affecting land ownership and revenue records ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 5983"] ["2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 20149"].
Analysis and Conclusion:
References:- ["2017 0 Supreme(MP) 859"]- ["2024 0 Supreme(MP) 420"]- ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 5983"]- ["
BABU vs LAXMAN - Madhya Pradesh
"]- ["2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 20149"]- ["2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 43262"]
Land ownership disputes often hinge on precise boundary definitions. Imagine purchasing property only to face uncertainty over its exact limits due to improper . A frequent concern among landowners is without having number—a process where land boundaries are marked without assigning or completing (detailed measurement and mapping). This article delves into why such practices are typically problematic, drawing from judicial observations and revenue procedures.
In Indian revenue systems, particularly under codes like the , establishes physical land boundaries. are unique identifiers in linking plots to maps and ownership details. involves on-ground measurement, mapping in , and updating .
Without these, boundaries remain ambiguous. As noted, without the of , especially when the khasra area is less than the prescribed minimum (less than 5 dismil), is legally problematic and may lack and validity 2024 0 Supreme(MP) 420. Proper procedures ensure boundaries are fixed and recorded with 2024 0 Supreme(MP) 420.
Generally, no. lacking khasra number assignment and is not legally valid or complete 2024 0 Supreme(MP) 420. Courts have ruled it jurisdictionally defective, especially for khasra areas under 5 dismil, where hasn't occurred and maps/ are unprepared 2024 0 Supreme(MP) 420.
Revenue inspectors or tahsildars typically lack authority for such actions. based solely on , without khasra , exceeds legal powers and renders proceedings invalid 2024 0 Supreme(MP) 420.
In one case, proceedings were quashed due to improper : and was not properly done... the is justified in holding that the land and was not properly done though there is overwhelming evidence on record that the and was properly done 2019 0 Supreme(Chh) 925. The court emphasized suspicious conduct by officials and absent boundary details, deeming improper 2019 0 Supreme(Chh) 925.
Similarly, It is alleged that Survey No. 227/2 is a part of Survey No. 227, therefore, there is no requirement for fresh ... the application was allowed by the on the basis of the report given by R.I.—yet remanded for compliance with prior orders under 2019 0 Supreme(MP) 574.
Another instance involved re- post-judgment: Respondent... preferred an application before for doing re-... remanded the matter back to Tehsildar for re- and partition due to wrong 2022 Supreme(Online)(MP) 1765.
These rulings underscore that skipping khasra and invites challenges.
Revenue rules mandate:- Field measurements with reference to .- Updates to revenue maps and .- No for sub-5 dismil khasra without 2024 0 Supreme(MP) 420.
Applications under sections like require certified extracts from maps, khasras, and khatauni, plus fees (e.g., Rs. 1000 per survey number) 2022 0 Supreme(All) 936. Officials must verify compliance before proceeding 2022 0 Supreme(All) 936.
In a Chhattisgarh case, in original khasra was noted but wrongly reported, leading to injunction disputes 2024 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 19536. Courts stress notice and impleading parties 2019 0 Supreme(MP) 574.
For instance, a suit for failed due to unproven and cancelled 2016 0 Supreme(MP) 785. Landowners risk litigation, as seen in exchanges halted by improper 2019 0 Supreme(Chh) 925.
Rarely permissible. Even if exists for parent survey numbers, sub-divisions demand fresh processes unless court-ordered 2019 0 Supreme(MP) 574. Proposals with farmer consent may proceed, but objections trigger scrutiny 2024 Supreme(Online)(Mp) 35182. Sale deeds alone don't suffice without official khasra fixation 2024 0 Supreme(MP) 420.
To safeguard rights:- Verify khasra and before purchase.- Ensure applications include required documents and notices 2022 0 Supreme(All) 936.- Challenge invalid reports via revisions or courts 2019 0 Supreme(MP) 574.- Authorities should adhere to thresholds and prepare maps 2024 0 Supreme(MP) 420.
Stakeholders: Land authorities must ensure that are properly demarcated and recorded before proceeding with boundary 2024 0 Supreme(MP) 420. Courts may scrutinize and set aside non-compliant reports 2024 0 Supreme(MP) 420.
without proper and typically lacks legal validity, exposing landowners to disputes and invalid titles. Always prioritize revenue-compliant procedures for certainty.
Key Takeaways:- Invalid without khasra/, especially <5 dismil 2024 0 Supreme(MP) 420.- Courts quash defective processes 2019 0 Supreme(Chh) 925 2016 0 Supreme(MP) 785.- Follow rules for applications and notices 2022 0 Supreme(All) 936.
This article provides general insights based on cited cases and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
References:1. 2024 0 Supreme(MP) 420: Core on invalidity without khasra/.2. 1969 0 Supreme(SC) 521: prerequisite for rights.3. 2019 0 Supreme(Chh) 925, 2019 0 Supreme(MP) 574, others as noted.
#LandDemarcation #KhasraBatankan #LandLawIndia
Suppose those documents were not produced and under the directions of this Court if any Simankan is done then the revenue officers cannot demarcate the land without having Batankan number on the specified land i.e. 4150 sq. yard. ... the land of petitioners prior to demarcation. ... The report indicates that no documents have been produced by the petitioners regarding Batankan. ... The claim of the petitioner in the said petition was that for a part of Khasra No. 1413 the civil Court granted a decree to....
He also submits that unless batankan is done in the field map/village map, there is no question of demarcation of boundaries of survey number or sub-division of survey number. 18. ... Now question arises as to whether any Revenue Inspector or Tahsildar can entertain an application under section 129 of the MPLRC for demarcation of a khasra number which is having area less than 5 dismil and where no batankan has been done in the map and can demarcate such khasra #HL_STA....
It is alleged that Survey No. 227/2 is a part of Survey No. 227, therefore, there is no requirement for fresh batankan of this Survey number. ... It is further alleged that respondent without impleading the petitioner and without informing or issuing notice filed an application for batankan/partition before the Tahsildar, Gwalior and the application was allowed by the Tahsildar on the basis of the report given by R.I. vide order dated 28.2.2011 ... Land Revenue Code were initiated by respondent alleging....
The trial Court assigned various reasons for not accepting the Demarcation Report. However, the Appellate Court, without adverting to the same, relied on such Demarcation Report. ... In view of the above, in my opinion, after proper Batankan of the map, a fresh demarcation is necessary for proper identitification of the land. 9. In the matter of Shreepat v. ... Accordingly, the matter is remitted to the trial Court with a direction to hear the same afresh on receipt of a fresh Demarcation#HL_E....
demarcation and Batankan was not properly done. ... In these circumstances learned First Appellate Court arrived at a finding that demarcation and Batankan were not properly done. ... (ii) Whether the first appellate Court is justified in holding that the land demarcation and Batankan was not properly done though there is overwhelming evidence on record that the demarcation and Batankan was properly done ... Proper demarcation o....
that demarcation and Batankan was not properly done. ... (ii) Whether the first appellate Court is justified in holding that the land demarcation and Batankan was not properly done though there is overwhelming evidence on record that the demarcation and Batankan was properly done ?” 13. ... In these circumstances learned First Appellate Court arrived at a finding that demarcation and Batankan were not properly done. ... Proper demarcation#....
He propounds that in case no adjoining land owner moves application for batankan then the application of the petitioners will be kept pending and it is every likelihood that the adjoining land owners will wittingly not move the application for batankan. ... ORDER By the instant petition, the petitioners are raising grievance in respect of an order dated 18.12.2022 passed by the SDO on an objection raised by the respondent whereby after getting demarcation done and application submitted by the petitioner, the order had been passed by the ....
Respondent Omprakash Kushwah preferred an application before Naib Tehsildar for doing re-batankan on the basis of judgment passed by the executing court on 30.07.2012. ... Thereafter, Tehsildar referred the matter to Collector and the Collector remanded the matter back to Tehsildar for re-demarcation and partition of the land between the parties. ... At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per original judgment and decree, partition could not be took place due to wrong demarcation done by revenue authoritie....
Main submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that plot No.1345 is a big number, in which there are many persons including the petitioners recorded. Applicant/respondent No.6 Hukum Singh filed an application before the Tahsildar for its batankan as per its own number. ... Patwari submitted the proposal of batankan/partition along with the consent of concerned farmers. Notice was issued to other co-farmers, but none has come forward to file the objection. Thus, the Tahsildar alowed the proposal of ba....
He would further submit that Batankan has already been made in the original Khasra No.222 but in the demarcation report, the said fact has been wrongly mentioned and he prays to allow the petition. 4. ... Therefore, the present civil suit bearing No.225A/2013 has been filed before 14th Civil Judge Junior Division, Raipur for permanent injunction without impleading RamKhilwan Parganiha. ... ), Raipur in pending Civil Suit No.225A/2013, was disallowed, wherein petitioner had also raised a demand for fresh demarcation. ... ....
(2) No application for demarcation of boundaries under section 24(1) of the Code shall be entertained unless it is accompanied by certified extracts from the maps, Khasras and Record of Rights (Khatauni) on the basis of which demarcation is sought, and the required amount calculated at the rate of Rs. 1000/- per survey number of the applicant as fee for demarcation has been paid by the applicant. (4) On the receipt of the application the concerned official shall check the application as to whether the requirements have been fulfilled or not. (3) If the application is for de....
Both the lower Courts appear to be right in holding that in comparison to the evidence of Prahalad (P.W.1) and his interested witnesses (bataidars) Lalji Keer (P.W.2) and Harnarayan Keer (P.W.3), the evidence of the defendants' witnesses Suresh Kumar (D.W.1), Laxminarayan (D.W.2), Manisha (D.W.3) and Devendra Kumar (D.W.4) was more reliable due to supported by revenue documents. It is clear from the certified copy of the order dated 25.5.2010 passed by the Collector, Narsinghpur in the revision case that the demarcation and batankan proceedings were cancelled by the Collector and t....
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
