Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

BHOPAL SINGH & ANOTHER versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Bhopal Singh & Another v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - C No. - 48063 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 16277 (4 October 2007)

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble Janardan Sahai, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri N.N. Verma holding brief of Sri V.K. Singh, counsel for the respondent no. 2. Counsel for the parties agree that the petition may be disposed of finally.

The proceedings under Section 122-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act were initiated against the petitioners in respect of the Gaon Sabha plot khasra No.101, which is recorded as johar. According to the petitioners they are not in possession over the disputed land. However, there is a finding that the petitioners are in possession. The finding is one of fact. Counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners are aggrieved by the order imposing damages against them. As the order of eviction has not been challenged by the counsel, the said order is maintained. If the petitioners are found in possession it would be open to the respondents to dispossess them. With regard to the damages the contention is that the provisions of Rule 115-F of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules has not been followed in calculating the damages. There appears to be some merit in the petitioners' contention. The order of the Tehsildar and of the Collector do not disclose that the manner in which the damages have been worked out. It is therefore appropriate that the matter should go back to the Tehsildar for re-assessment of the damages in accordance with the provisions of law. The order of eviction is maintained but the order imposing damages is set aside. It is directed that damages shall be re-assessed in accordance with law. With the above directions the writ petition is partly allowed.

Dt. 4.10.2007

sn/wp. 48063/07


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.