Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.50 seconds)

Shamshad Alam And Ors vs State Of Bihar on 27 January, 2025

13. So far as the question of limitation is concerned, the trial court committed an error in holding the plaintiffs' suit to be barred by limitation as according to the case of plaintiffs, the title in favour of the plaintiffs in the suit land arose on 09.09.2000, when the sale deed was executed by their vendor in their favour in connection with the suit land. So, in such a situation, the limitation period for correcting the revenue records started either from the date of the execution of the sale deed or when plaintiffs' prayer for mutation in the suit land was denied by revenue authority as there was no reason for the plaintiffs to file a suit under sections 106 and 108 of B.T. Act before getting a title in the land in question. And, it is an established law that mere an adverse entry in the revenue records will not give rise to cause of action, the right to sue accrues when there is a clear and unequivocal threat to infringe a right and in this regard, the observation made by this Court in Patna High Court FA No.83 of 2010 dt.27-01-2025 13/14 the case of The State of Bihar & Anr. vs. Alakh Singh & Ors. reported in 2013 (4) PLJR 363 is relevant.
Patna High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - S Singh - Full Document

Alakh Niranjan Rai @ Alakhu Rai vs State Of U.P. on 14 July, 2023

3. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant- Alakh Niranjan Rai @ Alakhu Rai, against the judgement and order dated 03.12.2005 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Azamgarh, in S.T. No. 320 of 1997 (State vs. Alakh Niranjan Rai @ Alakhu Rai) under Section 323 I.P.C. and section 3(1) (10) Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, P.S.- Tahbarpur, District Azamgarh.
Allahabad High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - S Gopal - Full Document
1