Sudesh Kumari And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 13 January, 2016
18. The reason which has been portrayed in the above extracted
paragraph, rather for the Division Bench taking the above view, arose from
its concluding, that in the legislature employing the said coinages in the
above extracted provision, is therebys thus deemed not to waste its words or
to say anything in vain and a construction which attributes redundancy to the
Legislature, except for compelling reasons rather will not be accepted.
Therefore, to avoid the assigning of redundancy to the employment of the
statutory coinage (supra), in the provisions cast under Section 7 of the Act of
1961, thus the Division Bench of this Court concluded, that the expanse of
the said statutory coinages, spreads even to a situation, whereby the
respondent in the eviction petition, who despite not rearing, thus within the
domain of the proviso, as occurs thereins, hence any question of title,
whereby he/she resists the assertion of title, as made to the disputed lands by
the petitioner/Gram Panchayat in the eviction petition, rather becoming
empowered to avail the revisional remedies (supra). The judgment (supra)
also became concurred by a verdict rendered by the Division Bench of this
Court in case titled as Sudesh Kumar and others versus State of Haryana
and others, reported in 2019(4) PLR 204.