section 250 cannot said to be
beyond the limitation.
12. The answering respondent thereupon filed an
application under section 250 of the MPLRC before ... 5156/2019
therefore, section 250 proceeding ought not to have been
invoked. For ready reference section 250 MPLRC is
reproduced below:
250. Reinstatement of bhumiswami
miscellaneous petition, he has
challenged the order passed under Section 250 of MPLRC,
therefore, he may be heard on the merits of the said order ... absence of any relief for quashment
of order passed under Section 250 of MPLRC, he cannot be heard
on the merits of the said order
respondent No.1
instead of filing an application under Section 250 of MPLRC before the
Tehsildar, issued notice to the appellants to hand-over ... light of expressed provisions of Section 257
r/w 250 of MPLRC. The said application was allowed by the trial Court and
consequently, the suit
occupation of the petitioners and therefore, by filing
application under Section 250 MPLRC, prayer was made to dispossess the
present petitioner from the land owned ... over land of the respondent who is the landowner and Section
250 MPLRC gives power and authority for reistatement of possession of
Bhumiswami
occupation of the petitioners and therefore, by filing
application under Section 250 MPLRC, prayer was made to dispossess the
present petitioner from the land owned ... over land of the respondent who is the landowner and Section
250 MPLRC gives power and authority for reistatement of possession of
Bhumiswami
occupation of the petitioners and therefore, by filing
application under Section 250 MPLRC, prayer was made to dispossess the
present petitioner from the land owned ... over land of the respondent who is the landowner and Section
250 MPLRC gives power and authority for reistatement of possession of
Bhumiswami
Bhumiswami, is not entitled to take recourse to
proceedings under Section 250, MPLRC. It is also submitted that in absence of
any material to show ... dispossessed the
respondent, no orders could have been passed under Section 250, MPLRC
and, therefore, the order of the learned Additional Commissioner being contrary
petition are that the respondent herein
moved an application under section 250 of MPLRC before the Tehsildar,
Maksudangarh, District Guna seeking dispossession of the petitioners ... respect of the same
land respondent moved an application under section 250 of MPLRC before the
Tehsildar, Maksudangarh which came to be rejected vide order
conducted in case No.10A/70/16-17 under Section 250
MPLRC, 1959 was allowed and possession of the disputed land was
directed ... basis of application
filed by the respondents under Section 250 MPLRC, on some portion
of land, the possession of petitioners was found. Since with regard
fact that the applicability of the provisions of Section 250 of MPLRC was
questioned which was required to be dealt with by the authorities ... land was bifurcated into plots, thus the
application under Section 250 of MPLRC was not applicable. The
Commissioner though referred to the said findings
