Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SHERYAR KHAN versus BOR AJMER

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


SHERYAR KHAN v BOR AJMER - CW Case No. 4202 of 1997 [2006] RD-RJ 2883 (22 November 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JAIPUR BENCH

JUDGMENT

Sheryar Khan & Others Vs. Board of Revenue Ajmer & Others

(SB Civil Writ Petition No.4202/1997)

SB Civil Writ Petition under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India.

Date of order: November 22, 2006.

PRESENT

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIV KUMAR SHARMA

Mr. J.P.Goyal, for the petitioners.

Mr. M.L.Goyal, Addl.Government Advocate for the State.

BY THE COURT:

The application moved under section 212 Rajasthan Tenancy

Act,1955 seeking appointment of receiver was dismissed by the Sub

Divisional Officer Karauli. However on appeal Revenue Appellate Authority allowed the appeal and appointed receiver. The defendant preferred appeal against the said order that was allowed by Board of Revenue. Against the said order of Board of Revenue, the plaintiff petitioners have preferred instant writ petition. 2. I have heard Mr. Goyal and scanned the material on record. 3. Having heard the submissions and on scanning the material on record, I do not see any illegality in the order of Board of Revenue. In my opinion, since the land was not in medio no receiver could have been appointed. The finding of facts arrived at by the Board of Revenue cannot be interfered with in writ jurisdiction. In Sadhana Lodh Vs. National

Insurance Co. Ltd. (2003)3 SCC 524, their Lordships of Supreme Court defined the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of

India as under:-

"The supervisory jurisdiction conferred on the High Courts under Article 227 of the Constitution is confined only to see whether an inferior court or tribunal has proceeded within its parameters and not to correct an error apparent on the face of the record, much less of an error of law. In exercising the supervisory power under Article 227 of the Constitution, the

High Court does not act as an appellate court or the tribunal. It is also not permissible to a High Court on a petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution to review or reweigh the evidence upon which the inferior court or tribunal purports to have passed the order or to correct errors of law in the decision." 4. For these reasons, I do not find any merit in the writ petition and the same stands dismissed without any order as to costs.

(Shiv Kumar Sharma),J. arn/


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.