Jag Ram Ors Vs Deputy Director Of Consolidation
.... sildar however disbelieved such compromise. A copy of the Tehsildar’s order dated 17.12.1963 was produced by Smt. Rajdei before the Consolidation Officer which showed the Case No.36 was dismissed by the Tehsildar for non prosecution. The Consolidation Officer found that the name of Smt. Bachauna ...
Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench)
Manju Devi Vs Board Of Revenue Allahabad And Ors
.... y Director of Consolidation, Gonda and others: Writ Petition No.459 (Consolidation) of 2002, decided today i.e. 28.05.2020, that no such compromise could have been made the basis of decreeing the suit by the trial court. 50. In the case of Parsottam vs. Narottam; 1970 ALJ 505, it was held b ...
Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench)
Ram Dei Vs Joint Director Of Consolidation And Ors
.... nal Authority have not at all mentioned material and relevant oral evidence of these witnesses on this issue. Sri Bhola Nath Yadav, learned Counsel for the respondents does not dispute the fact that the oral evidence, about identity of Smt. Sona Kunwar, has not been considered by the Appellate a ...
Allahabad High Court
Jai Prakash Vs Board Of Revenue And Others
.... dent income of Ram Swarup is not relevant to decide the dispute between the parties and the present writ petition. The claim of Sagar Dutt is not dependent on a decision on the issue as to whether the suit property was a joint family property or the separate property of Ram Swarup. It is not the ...
Allahabad High Court
Vijay Kumar and Another Vs Bal Krishan and Others
.... o 1/10th share. The second appeal by the Respondent was dismissed on 19.09.2002. Aggrieved, the Respondent preferred W.P.(M/S) No. 1209 of 2002 assailing the same. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition holding that the declaration of the Respondent having 1/10th share only in the suit l ...
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Chandra Bhan Vs Smt. Ashwati
.... e is situated in the South but he does not know what is constructed there and he does not know how many sheds are there in that property. From this the trial court has concluded that this witness was probably not present at the time of writing of the Will. This witness also could not explain as to w ...
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Raj Ballabh Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation
.... does not affect its maintainability. It has also examined the scope of the word ''person aggrieved'' and has held that an appeal or revision filed after notification under section 52 of the C.H. Act along with an application under section 5 of the Limitation Act can be entertained and, if the app ...
Allahabad High Court
Nagar Nigam Vs Smt. Krishna Devi and Others
.... r, Nagar Nigam, Lucknow for removal of the alleged illegal possession over the land in dispute, but the said notice was withdrawn by Nagar Nigam, after submission of reply by Sri Bharat Singh. Thereafter, on 9.12.2003, a fresh notice was given by Tehsildar, Nagar Nigam to Sri Bharat Singh and in the ...
Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench)
Jota Devi Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation
.... .10.1972 after the death of Shambhu Sharan Singh. Why it was not produced for registration in the life time of Shambhu Sharan Singh is an unanswered question. The priest who solemnized the rituals of adoption was not examined. The other witnesses who have been examined before the A.C.O. are one way ...
Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench)
Kamla Kant and Another Vs IIIrd Additional District Judge and Others
.... ertainly not include the power to entertain fresh evidence and re-examine the question as to whether the two sons, namely, Hamendra and Shailendra were major or not. The power u/s 38B merely indicates that if any finding or decision was there by any ancillary forum prior to the commencement of the s ...
Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench)
Get In Touch With Us
We are here to help. Want to learn more about our services? Please get in touch, we'd love to hear from you!
