Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.36 seconds)

Kamlesh Kumar vs Board Of Revenue Lucknow And Others on 3 May, 2023

18. In the present case there is a transitory provision contained in Section 10 of the amendment Act which save only those proceedings which were pending before the Board of Revenue. Thus, the proceeding which was pending before the Additional Commissioner on 18.08.1997 was required to be decided under the provisions of Section 219 of the amended Act. We are, therefore, unable to subscribe to the view taken by the learned Judge in Kali Shanker Dwivedi (supra) and agree with the view taken in Sri Ram (supra)."
Allahabad High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 1 - R S Chauhan - Full Document

Laxami Kant And Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue ... on 15 July, 2022

It is settled proposition of law that a writ petition challenging orders passed in mutation proceedings would not be maintainable which is evident from the judgements and orders passed by this Court in the case of Kali Shanker Dwivedi vs Board of Revenue and another reported in 2000 (18) LCD 1401 as well as by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Bhimabai Mahadeo Lambekar vs Arthur Import and Export Company and others reported in (2019) 3 SCC 191.
Allahabad High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - A Moin - Full Document
1