Divi Hari Krishna - Summary and Insights
Legal Rights and Government Authority
The division bench upheld the State Government's right to formulate rules under Section 15(1) of the Act of 1957 concerning dead rent, aligning with Supreme Court decisions (e.g., D.K. Trivedi case). This affirms the state's authority in land and revenue matters, including rules related to dead rent. Krishna Murari Goyal VS State of Rajasthan - Rajasthan
Land and Possession Cases
Several judgments emphasize that lawful possession, not unlawful or wrongful, is crucial in land disputes. Section 53-A cannot be invoked for possession claims, and the basis for compensation of land value is the market rate. The courts also recognize the importance of the situs or jurisdiction where the case is heard, asserting that the High Court of the relevant state has exclusive jurisdiction. Polisetti Veeraiah VS Oruganti Rama Narsaiah - Andhra Pradesh, Polisetti Veeraiah VS Oruganti Rama Narsaiah - Andhra Pradesh, Krishna Murari Goyal VS State of Rajasthan - Rajasthan
Water Resources and Construction Disputes
In disputes involving water course construction and resource utilization, investigations involved multiple witnesses, and authorities monitored the use of cement from government stores, indicating procedural adherence in such cases. Praveen Kumar VS State of Rajasthan - Rajasthan
Judicial Principles on Rent and Ownership
Quit-rent is distinguished from rent as per Section 3(11), with courts clarifying that it is not rent but a different form of land revenue. The cases also discuss the nature of possession—lawful versus unlawful—and the applicability of Section 53-A in retention of possession cases. Jurugumilli Brahmayya Minor By VS Chellaghali Achiraju - Madras
Miscellaneous References
Other references include discussions on the competency of courts to hear references, the doctrine of situs, and the importance of jurisdiction in legal proceedings involving land and revenue. These highlight procedural nuances in administrative and civil cases involving individuals like Hari Shankar. Ambica Industries VS Commissioner of Central Excise - Supreme Court, Partha Das @ Partha Kumar Das VS State of Tripura & Ors. - Gauhati
Specific Cases Involving Hari Krishna
The references to Sunita Bai Yadav and related proceedings suggest ongoing administrative or legal processes involving individuals named Hari, possibly related to land or resource allocation, but details are limited.
Analysis and Conclusion:
The sources collectively emphasize the importance of lawful possession, the state's authority to regulate dead rent, and jurisdictional clarity in land and revenue disputes. In the context of Divi Hari Krishna, these principles suggest that any legal issues involving him would revolve around lawful possession, adherence to government rules, and proper jurisdiction. The consistent judicial stance favors the state's authority and clarifies procedural standards for resolving disputes involving land, rent, and resource management.
Note: Due to limited specific context about Divi Hari Krishna, the summary synthesizes relevant legal principles and case references related to land, possession, and administrative authority from the provided sources.
State of Rajasthan & Ors. (1) and in Hari Shanker vs. State of Rajasthan (2), Bal Mukand Arora & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (3) and Atma Ram Bilochi &Ors. vs. ... The Divi- sion Bench has upheld the right of State Government to frame rules in exercise of the powers under Section 15(1) of the Act of 1957in regard to the dead rent. The question is no longer in dispute in view of decision of the Supreme Court in D.K. Trivedi and Sons & Ors. vs. ... Thus there appears, to us, no conflict in the view taken in Hari Shanker vs. State of ....
Krishna S/o Shri Jeewanram, Krishnaram S/o Chokharam Mubarak and Ganpat are the residents of Chak 2- B.L.D. where the water courses were being constructed at the relevant time and the cement supplied from the Stores of RD-112 P.B. and RD-66 B.L.D. was being utilised. ... The investigating agency recorded the statements of 42 witnesses, which can be divi-ded into six groups. ... It was stated in the First Information report that Shri Hari Singh Bhati Executive Engineers, Bailor Division, R.C.P. CAD Bikaner, Shri Mukat Behari Lal Mathur, As....
Rev Divi Officer and Raghubans Narain v. ... Krishna Iyer, J. ... Krishna lyer, J. while agreeing with Raman Nayar, J (as he then was) in state vs Mariamma (11) (supra), explained thus:"merc production of documents evidencing transactions of sale will not make the recitals regarding purchases admissible nor will the comparative features be manifest from the deeds themselves ... (Vide Hari Singh Thakur s case (1) (supra ). The basis to determine compensation of the market value of the land acquired is the value of the lan....
Krishna Murthy14 approved the ratio in Syed Jalal's case (8 supra) viz., “the possession referred to here is lawful possession and not unauthorised or unlawful or wrongful possession.” It was held therein that Sec. 53-A cannot be used for the purpose of the suit. In M. Pocham v. Agent State Govt. ... Under those circumstances, the Divi-sion Bench applying Section 53-A as a defence, upheld to retain possession. In Technicians Studio v. ... In Hari Prasad v. Abdul Haq7, B.P. Sinha, J. (as he then was) speaking for the Division Bench held th....
Krishna Murthy14 approved the ratio in Syed Jalal's case (8 supra) viz., “the possession referred to here is lawful possession and not unauthorised or unlawful or wrongful possession.” It was held therein that Sec. 53-A cannot be used for the purpose of the suit. In M. Pocham v. Agent State Govt. ... Under those circumstances, the Divi-sion Bench applying Section 53-A as a defence, upheld to retain possession. In Technicians Studio v. ... In Hari Prasad v. Abdul Haq7, B.P. Sinha, J. (as he then was) speaking for the Division Bench held th....
Hari Shankar, learned counsel places strong reliance, in our opinion, does not answer the question placed before us. ... In this judgment, the Divi- sion Bench has assigned yet another reason why the High Court of that State wherefrom the matter arises would only be competent to hear the reference. ... Hari Shankar, learned counsel, as noticed hereinbefore, is inconsistent and contradictory. The doctrine of dominus litus or doctrine of situs of the Appellate Tribunal do not go together. ... Hari Shankar, learned counsel ....
Hari Krishna Naidu 5 Ind. ... Divi Seetharamudu 51 Ind. Cas. 304 : 43 M. 166 : 17 A.L.J. 725 : 37 M.L.J. 42 : 21 Bom. ... Consistently with this view, Spencer and Krishnan, JJ., held in Singaraju Venkatasubbramaniam v. Rajah of Venkatagiri 56 Ind. Cas. 552 : 11 L.W. 523 with reference to the application of Section 61, that quit-rent is not rent, as defined in Section 3(11) in its present form.
In Hari Narain v. ... In his view Krishan Lal was a mochi and not a chamar and we do not see any reason why we should come to any different conclusion." ... 23. ... The State Level Scrutiny Committee, after examination of the Vigilance Report, other report/records sent by the Sub Divi#31;sional Magistrate can take its own decision. ... After careful examination of the application in its meeting on 12.6.2012, the SLSC considered 5 (five) witnesses namely (1) Sri Hari Prasad Datta, s/o Lt.NagendraCh.Datta, (2) Sri Subash C....
Versus Versus Versus Sunita Bai Yadav D/o Shri Hari ... Process of Allocation of Division Candidates equal to the number of posts advertised divi- Versus Krishan
Versus Versus Versus Sunita Bai Yadav D/o Shri Hari ... Process of Allocation of Division Candidates equal to the number of posts advertised divi- Versus Krishan
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.