Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.20 seconds)Jaipal Singh And Anr. vs Board Of Revenue U.P. Allahabad And Ors. on 5 April, 1956
"10. Further, it is settled view of this Court that it should not interfere with the order issued by the authorities while deciding the proceedings under Section 34 of the Land Revenue Act, as in the said proceedings the issue only in respect to record the name of tenure holder in the revenue record is under consideration. Such an entry does not ordinarily confer upon the person in whose favour it is made any title of property in question and his right is to be established as per the procedure provided under law (see Jaipal v. Board of Revenue, U.P., Allahabad and Others, Smt. Lakhpati and Another v. Board of Revenue, U.P., State of U.P. through Collector, Agra v. Board of Revenue at Lucknow and others, Shiv Raj Gupta v. Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow, Pooran Singh v. Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow and others), hence I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order dated 18.06.2012 (Annexure no. 1) passed by opposite party no. 1/Board of Revenue, Lucknow."
Madhav Pandey And Ors. vs Board Of Revenue And Ors. on 8 March, 2002
11. Similar view has been taken by Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan, J. in the case of Madhav Pandey & Ors. vs. Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow & Ors. [2002 (20) LCD 1439. Relevant extracts of paras- 24 & 30 of the judgment is being reproduced below:
Vinod Kumar Rajbhar vs State Of U.P. And Others on 3 January, 2012
13. Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal, J. in the case of Vinod Kumar Rajbhar vs. State of U.P and Ors. [2012(1) ADJ 792], has described the character of mutation proceedings in para- 5, which is being reproduced below:
Section 34 in The Punjab Land Revenue Rules [Entire Act]
Section 40 in The U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 [Entire Act]
Section 174 in The U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 [Entire Act]
Smt. Sawarni vs Smt. Inder Kaur And Others on 23 August, 1996
In the case of Smt. Sawarni v. Inder Kaur & Ors. [1996 (6) SCC], Hon'ble Apex Court has held in para-7 as under:
The U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950
Suraj Bhan & Ors vs Financial Commissioner & Ors on 16 April, 2007
9. Similar view has been taken in para-9 of the judgment in the case of Suraj Bhan & Ors. vs. Financial Commissioner & Ors. [(2007) 6 SCC 186]. Relevant extract of the judgment is being reproduced below: