Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.18 seconds)Chandra Bhan And Parashu Ram, Both Sons ... vs Deputy Director Of Consolidation And ... on 13 December, 2005
6. It has been urged by learned Counsel for petitioners that no objection was filed by any of the objectors against petitioners as such Consolidation Officer had no jurisdiction to expunge names of petitioners. It has further been contended that in any view of the matter, notification under Section 4(2) of the Act was published in Official Gazette on 10.10.1987 whereas declaration in the unit was made on 30th January, 1988 and both the sale deeds in favour of petitioner No. 1 and petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 were executed on 8.10.1987 and 16.10.1987 much before declaration in the unit, sale-deed would not be void for want of permission from Settlement Officer Consolidation. Reliance in support of contention has been placed on a decision of learned single Judge in the case of Ram Chandra v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Ghaziabad and Ors. 2001 (92) RD 531 : 2001 (3) AWC 1799 and Madan Lal v. Deputy Director of Consolidation and Ors. 2004 (96) RD 8.
Lal Man vs Dy. Director Of Consolidation And Ors. on 1 August, 1996
6. It has been urged by learned Counsel for petitioners that no objection was filed by any of the objectors against petitioners as such Consolidation Officer had no jurisdiction to expunge names of petitioners. It has further been contended that in any view of the matter, notification under Section 4(2) of the Act was published in Official Gazette on 10.10.1987 whereas declaration in the unit was made on 30th January, 1988 and both the sale deeds in favour of petitioner No. 1 and petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 were executed on 8.10.1987 and 16.10.1987 much before declaration in the unit, sale-deed would not be void for want of permission from Settlement Officer Consolidation. Reliance in support of contention has been placed on a decision of learned single Judge in the case of Ram Chandra v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Ghaziabad and Ors. 2001 (92) RD 531 : 2001 (3) AWC 1799 and Madan Lal v. Deputy Director of Consolidation and Ors. 2004 (96) RD 8.
Section 47 in The Registration Act, 1908 [Entire Act]
The Punjab Land Revenue Rules
Section 4 in U.P Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 [Entire Act]
Raj Bali Singh vs The Deputy Director Of Consolidation ... on 17 November, 1971
14. Same view has been taken by another learned single Judge in the case of Raj Singh v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Saharanpur and Ors. 1997 (88) RD 348 : 1997 (2) AWC 2.239 (SC). In paragraph 12 of the judgment it has been observed as under:
Nagina vs Dy. Director Of Consolidation, ... on 10 February, 1998
13. In so far as other sale deed dated 16.10.1987 in favour of petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 is concerned it was executed in between the period of publication of notification under Section 4(2)(a) of the Act in the Official Gazette on 10.10.1987 and publication in the Unit on 30.1.1988 as required by Section 4(2)(b) of the Act. The validity of sale deeds executed without permission of Settlement Officer Consolidation, in between the period of publication of notification in the official Gazette under Section 4(2)(a) of the Act and publication in the unit under Section 4(2)(b) of the Act has been subject matter of adjudication by this Court in a number of decisions. Reference may be made to the decision of a learned single Judge in the case of Nagina and Ors. v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Muzaffarnagar and Ors. 1997 RJ 286 : 1997 (1) AWC 29. On a detail analysis of the provisions of the Act, it was observed by the learned single Judge as follows:
1