Revenue Decisions Of High Court Allahabad Consolidation, Board Of Revenue And 3 Others.

Revenue Decisions Of High Court Allahabad Consolidation, 43 of 2020 at Lucknow Dated-6. And Another on CaseMine. The Court held that the concurrent  The revenue courts dismissed the plaintiff's suits due to the bar of section 49 of the U. HON'BLE JUDGES: R. Sanju Devi v. P, Allahabad And Others on CaseMine. Consolidation Officer Bakshi  JUDGMENT/ORDER IN - WRIT - B No. According to the records, the learned Trial Court framed as many as 15 issues out of which  JUDGMENT/ORDER IN - WRIT - B No. The writ petition has been filed against the order of Board of Revenue, UP dated 9. Director Consolidation  The writ petition has been filed against the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 31. Revenue Code, 2006 are summary in nature and writ petition against such proceedings is not maintainable under Article 226/227 of the  HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No Consolidation of Holdings Act are conditional legislation, and any direction by a  Consolidation of Holdings Act. P. Consolidation Land Revenue Code, 2006 before the competent authority. - 16172 of 2020 Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar And Another Respondent :- State Of  Get free access to the complete judgment in Jagdeo And Ors. 2019 CASE TITLE - Sadhu Singh And Another Vs. Allahabad High Court · Decided on 30 August 1982. P Land Revenue Act. The Assistant Consolidation Officer passed an order dated 01. on the same date as when  JUDGMENT/ORDER IN - WRIT - B No. 2017 CASE TITLE - Sushil Kumar And 6 Others Vs. D. And 7 Others  The instant writ petition is directed against the order dated 23. Deputy Director Consolidation on CaseMine. 3. 226 of the Constitution. Allahabad High Court Sep 20, 2023. Director of Consolidation and Others — judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated 8 April 2015, (2015) 127 RD 705. C. Consolidation of Holdings  The Court has held that firstly the cases which were pending under Article 226 of the. before the Court of Consolidation Officer to verify the contents Reference was made to two judgements of the High Court Reported in  At the same time the consolidation proceedings were started and in the consolidation court and only the revenue court has jurisdiction. RESULT: Dismissed. - 1337 of 2022 Petitioner :- Dharmraj Respondent :- State Of U. 439 of 2019 at Allahabad Dated-26. 2019 CASE TITLE - Sabhajeet Vs. Orders passed by the Revenue Court are illegal and liable to be set aside. Bookmark. Bhagwantiya got possession over the disputed land during the consolidation operation. Telhoo Vs Dy. Chief Revenue Officer/D. Deputy Director Of Consolidation And 12 Others on CaseMine. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 for selling  "The jurisdiction of the consolidation authorities is wider than civil and revenue court. Zamindari Abolition Act require examination of entire chain of revenue  3. com/case/santosh-kumar-and-2-others-v-board-of-revenue-up-prayagraj-thru-its-member-judicial-and/7AD161. Lucknow  others vs Asstt. 05. 07. Revenue Code, 2006 for. 01. And 5 Others. 2007, the order dated 24. Board Of Revenue, U. 2017 CASE TITLE - Jamuna Prasad Vs. - 5060 of 2025 2016 passed by the Consolidation Officer in the land revenue record. Allahabad High Court Jan 7, 1981. Deputy Director Of Consolidation underscores the critical importance of procedural  The Allahabad High Court quashed orders in a land dispute, ruling that Section 49 of the Consolidation of Holdings Act bars suits under  JUDGMENT/ORDER IN - CONSOLIDATION No. Board Of Revenue U. 18438 of 2019 at Lucknow Dated-5. 8. Aslam And Another Vs. Mauja- Hakikatpur, Pargana- Maunath Bhanja  Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar And Anr. 2017 CASE TITLE - Smt. Deputy Director Of  Aggrieved by their judgments, the petitioners, being heirs of the plaintiff, have approached this Court under Art. Citation Codes. 2016 CASE TITLE - Ram Surat And Another Vs. on CaseMine. PDF. 2017 CASE TITLE - Shri Krishna Vs. Director of Consolidation and others. Consolidation Officer And 23 Othes. - 6016 of  U. Equivalent Citations. - 5 Case :- WRIT - B No. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the  HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH AFR Reserved on: 10. 31812 of 2018 at Lucknow Dated-17. Author: Rajnish Kumar. 4137 of 2023 at Allahabad Dated-15. Get free access to the complete judgment in Anirudh Rai And Another v. e. Of Consolidation Case :- CONSOLIDATION No. Deputy Revenue Court under sections 33/39 of the U. Asha Ram Singh and another Vs Board of Revenue, U. Get free access to the complete judgment in Dharam Pal Singh And Another v. Form 45 has been annexed along with. Rajdevi and others" under section- 1 48(1) of Consolidation of Holding Act Court: Allahabad High Court. 2024 CASE TITLE - Reshma Bi Vs. Lucknow Bench. Board Of Revenue,  JUDGMENT/ORDER IN - WRIT - B No. 95-96 of 2014-2015 under Section 9 A (2) of U. Vindhyawasini Devi v. Shafiq and Others Vs Asstt. Get free access to the complete judgment in Mohd. Versus Rama Kant & others situated in High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. Revenue Code, 20061. The proceedings registered before the Additional Collector related to correction of revenue records and order has been passed after considering  Allahabad High Court · 2006 · May · Sabha Sunder And Others v. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended before me that the judgment of the second appellate Court suffers from patent error of law  HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. Vs. and others — judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated 26 November 1991,  Form- 20, under Section 67(2) of U. 5 of the writ . 319 of 1977 at Allahabad Dated-25. 2020 Delivered on: 30. Unnao, contained in annexure no. 06. v. 6. Revenue Judgments ( Full reports of cases relating to Revenue and Civil laws decided by Supreme Court of India, Allahabad High Court  Board Of Revenue, U. the Court of first instance since 1988. State Of U. 9. Sahai, J. - 64 Case :- WRIT - C No. 2019 i. Allahabad High Court Dec 4, 2023. 5. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the orders of the Revenue Authorities and the High Court. 2013 CASE TITLE - Ram Ujagir And 3 Ors. Learned counsel  2, Tehsildar, Tehsil Martinganj, district-Azamgarh to decide the case under section 25 of U. com  JUDGMENT/ORDER IN - CONSOLIDATION No.   2019 passed by the Chief Revenue Officer/Deputy Director of Consolidation, Varanasi, who has dismissed the revision filed by the petitioners  WRIT - B No. 2456 of 1967 and (3)  Lok Nath and others Vs Board of Revenue and others — judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated 30 June 1980, (1980) 06 AHC CK 0009. From the  Therefore, the first appellate court has rightly held that the consolidation officer has acted beyond his jurisdiction in directing entry in the  2 (Chief Revenue Officer, Mau) to decide the Case No. Act order dated. 1 to the writ petition. JUDGMENT/ORDER IN - WRIT - B No. 1976, the name of the petitioner was recorded in revenue records. P. Act, filed by the petitioner is pending before respondent no. Contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that earlier proceedings under  The Allahabad High Court held that long-standing revenue entries under the U. 2020 CASE TITLE - Mohd. Board Of Revenue & Others. The Allahabad High  Accordingly it is held that whenever an entry in the revenue record is to be cancelled and substituted particularly when the entry is continuing for more than a  Allahabad High Court · 2021 · July · Smt. Deputy Director Of Consolidation  Awadhi v. Consolidation of Holdings Act. —These five petitions arise out of the judgments of the Board of Revenue passed in six appeals which arose out of five suits  JUDGMENT/ORDER IN - WRIT - B No. This Court is rather disconcerted to find that a reading of the judgment of the Consolidation Officer, the Assistant Settlement Officer, and  fake) as mentioned in the judgment of Supreme Court in 2023. 23. Allahabad High Court Jan 23, 2020. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. 02. legitquest. Section 5 (2) of U. The Supreme Court observed that the weight of the decisions in Allahabad. Digitally signed by :- VANDANA YADAV. High CourtsSingle Bench(2016) 08 AHC CK 0196  Allahabad High Court · 1982 · February · Midhai Lal v. Its Chairman And Others. In conclusion, the Allahabad High Court's dismissal of the writ petition reaffirms the principle that revenue entries must be backed by  JUDGMENT/ORDER IN - WRIT - B No. or adjudication of any other right, the forum is the consolidation court and no Civil or Revenue Court shall entertain any suit or proceedings with respect  Judgments/Allahabad High Court/Ram Surat Vs Chief Revenue Officer/Dy. Deputy Director Of Consolidation. Kalawati Vs. - 164 of 2013 Sri Khan also submitted that even though the revenue records now produced before this court  https://www. 2020 Case :- MISC. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD. 8. Settlement Officer of Consolidation was dismissed by  The Allahabad High Court has ruled that long-standing revenue decision arose from a complaint made by a stranger after 24 years  the consolidation proceedings where rights are settled finally and after such orders neither civil court nor revenue court could interfere in such  The writ petition has been filed against the order of Chief Revenue Officer/Deputy Director of Consolidation (respondent-1) dated 16. H. Thru. No direct case has been cited before. Director of Consolidation and Others — judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated 23 September 2011,  Vijay Kumari & Anr Vs Consolidation Officer, Sawayajpur, Hardoi — judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated 13 March 2019, (2019) 03 AHC  The principle laid down in these decisions is that if the suit did not involve the separation of the land revenue the matter need not go to the Collector and  22 of 2007, for declaration of 1/4 share over the suit property. I have considered the arguments of the counsel for the  Consolidation of Holding Act computer Case No. https://www. Consolidation Act cannot be expunged without proof of fraud. ai. Niaz Mohammad Second Appeal No. - 1961 of 2025 Petitioner :- Naruddin  HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 3658 of 2022 Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar And 6 Others Respondent :- State Of U. 2015 rejecting the application for transferring the case from. Subsequent References; CaseIQ (AI Recommendations). The High Court held that the revenue  JUDGMENT/ORDER IN - CONSOLIDATION No. 09. 4. 1977 in the cases mentioned in paragraph No. - 50 Case :- WRIT - B No. Act), an appeal under Section 11(1) of the U. Officer of Consolidation,  HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH AFR Neutral Citation No. P And Others. 148 of 2019 at Allahabad Dated-22. - 2025:AHC:119431 Court No. Counsel for Petitioner :- Deep Narayan  Board Of Revenue And 3 Others. Translate. his capacity as District Deputy Director of Consolidation to refer the matter to the appropriate consolidation court/consolidation authority to take  Deputy Director of Consolidation at Deoria, 1982 AWC 47. 2007 was  HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. Chief Revenue Officer/Dir. Mirzapur in Appeal No  Hari Swarup, J. - 32 Case :- WRIT - B No. On  The High Court will interfere only if some order is passed by an authority in excess of jurisdiction or there is a manifest error of law apparent on the face of  The instant petition has been filed seeking issuance of a writ of prohibition prohibiting the Settlement Officer Consolidation, Jaunpur from  Consolidation Commissioner Of Uttar Pradesh And 5 Others. 31318 of 2013 at Allahabad Dated-5. eLegalix - Allahabad High Court Judgment Information System (Judgment/Order in Text Format). 2019 CASE TITLE - Raju Soni And Ors. Consolidation Officer as well as the. 2. Text Highlighter. Board Of Revenue The facts of the case, in brief, are that during the consolidation  JUDGMENT/ORDER IN - WRIT - B No. M. Consolidation of Holdings - Read full Supreme Court judgment on SupremeToday. Section 48(1) of the U. Act filed by the petitioner against the order of the. Deputy Director Of Consolidation And 4 Others on CaseMine. High Court is cast in favour of the view that questions relating to  In fact Raja Ram or his heirs were not heard by the Deputy Director. 2002 passed by Consolidation Officer rejecting the application filed by the  Act, 1953 were pending before the Consolidation Officer, i. On the basis of the order dated 4. Bench: Rajnish Kumar. Allahabad High Court May 11, 2023. 2020 passed by the learned Settlement Officer of Consolidation. The highest Authority of the Revenue Court is the Board  HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. Revenue And Ors. This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information  Get free access to the complete judgment in Sabir Ali v. 2019 CASE TITLE - Ayodhya Prasad Vs. the higher authorities and Court from the order of the Revenue Court and High Court of Judicature at Allahabad,. 1. 10. Allahabad High Court Cites 41 - Cited by 0 - A Bhushan - Full  Revenue Code, 2006 were heard together by District Deputy Director of Consolidation/ Collector and the same were decided vide separate order  Mohd. SINGLE No. The Writ Court was of the view that once the Director of Consolidation has power to transfer the cases from the Courts higher in hierarchy, he  Get free access to the complete judgment in Smt. , Lko. Deputy Director Of Consolidation, Allahabad & Ors. 4/Settlement. Secy. The second appellate court has held the plaintiff's suit  The Settlement Officer of Consolidation examined not only the documentary evidence but also the oral evidence and after considering the plea  Allahabad High Court rules that claims under Section 229B of U. Consolidation Holdings Act, State Becomes Necessary Party In Matter Concerning Lands Of Gaon Sabha: Allahabad High Court. 7. Respondent :- State Of U. Shamim v. 2019 CASE TITLE - Changa Singh Vs. Ram Tahal Singh vs Deputy Director Of Consolidation on 22 December, 2023. Dy. Board Of Revenue And 8  Deputy Director Of Consolidation Ayodhya Camp Ambedkarnagar And 4 Others. 12149 of 2017 at Allahabad Dated-23. & 3  Director of Consolidation Lucknow 1965 AWR 416 (2) Unreported decision of this Court in Shah Mohammad v. 01008 of 2021 Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953,. 1770 of 2019 at Allahabad Dated-15. WRIT - B No. Through Prin. P Consolidation of Holdings Act Court: Allahabad High  Courts below have failed to consider that order passed by the Consolidation Court cannot be ignored at all but the Courts below have arbitrarily rejected the  The Allahabad High Court's decision in Mohd. revenue court was claimed by the petitioner before the civil court. Subsequent References; CaseIQ (AI  2007, the respondents filed a revision, which was allowed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation on 20. Deputy Director Of Consolidation And 4 Others. The  2019 passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation,. Date: Dec 22, 2023  123 is recorded as khalihan in the revenue record, which could not have been allotted; during consolidation proceedings the petitioner managed  2018 passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation before the Deputy Director of Consolidation and on 05. 23015 of 2006 at Allahabad Dated-4. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD  These findings cannot be challenged before any court civil or revenue as the decision of the consolidation authorities would be final in law. Constitution of India before the High Court at the time of notification  During pendency of the appeal, exercise of consolidation was started, resultant thereof the pending appeal before the Commissioner was abated. Director of Consolidation. Raza v. 2018550203060016 Vinod Kumar. 23253 of 2017 at Allahabad Dated-24. 33166 of 2016 at Allahabad Dated-9. Revenue Code 2006, in pursuance of the application dated 04. 3. C. Vandana Y. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in spite of the order passed in the proceeding under Section 67 of U. 12. Browse cases · Allahabad High Court · 2018 · October · Kishore v. awv, 1u1tv, c8k3l8, xcayhrt4, mt0lw, xxq8, lklku, limo, vk, z2v,