High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Ram Dayal v. The Board Of Revenue U.P. At Allahabad & Others - WRIT - B No. 51942 of 2006  RD-AH 16617 (21 September 2006)
Hon'ble Anjani Kumar, J.
It is stated by Sri Swapnil Kumar, learned counsel for respondent nos. 10 and 11 that respondent no. 6 Sukh Ram, son of Pusey Ram, respondent no. 8 Ramji Lal son of Behari, respondent no. 9 Moto son of Sumer, respondent no. 15 Mahabir son of Beni Ram, respondent no. 16 Mukhti Lal son of Thaguni, respondent no. 20 Chameli wife of Mawasi Ram and respondent no. 22 Kirti Ram son of Kodi Ram are already dead and their heirs have not been impleaded.
Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri S. C. Verma states that the petitioner may be permitted to delete the aforementioned respondents from the array of the parties, as they have no concern with the controversy involved in this petition because the leases granted in their favour have already been cancelled by the order dated 17th May, 1994 and the aforementioned respondents have not challenged the order dated 17th May, 1994. Learned counsel for the petitioner may be permitted to delete respondents 6, 8, 9, 15, 16, 20 and 22 from the array of the parties.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Swapnil Kumar, learned counsel for respondent nos. 10 and 11, Sri V. K. Singh, learned counsel for respondent no. 5 and the learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 4.
Issue notice to rest of the respondents returnable at an early date. In the meantime, the respondents are directed to file their counter affidavit.
List thereafter. Until further orders of this Court, the parties are directed to maintain the status-quo as on today with regard to the possession over the land in dispute.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.