Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 24 (0.50 seconds)The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
The U.P. Imposition Of Ceiling On Land Holdings Act, 1960
U.P Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953
Section 5 in The Assam Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1960 [Entire Act]
Section 176 in The U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 [Entire Act]
Satya Pal Singh vs State Of M.P. And Ors on 6 October, 2015
26. The respondent Nos.2 and 3 ignored the fact that the petitioners held a total land of 121 bigha, 14 biswa and 15 biswansi, out of which an area of 38 bigha 15 biswa and 5 biswansi was out of consolidation and a total of 82 bigha 19 biswa and 10 biswansi land was within the consolidation operations, against which the petitioners were allotted an area of 68 bigha 8 biswa and 16 biswansi and thus an area of 14 bigha 10 biswa and 14 biswansi was reduced in consolidation and deducting the area of 14 bigha 10 biswa and 14 biswansi reduced in consolidation, a total of 107 bigha 4 biswa and 1 biswansi was held by the petitioners, which should have taken for determination of ceiling area and surplus land of the petitioners and after exemption of an area of 18.19 ares as grove land under Section 6 of the Act an area of 40 acres fair quality land, both totaling to almost 93 bighas 2 biswa and 2 biswansi, an area of 14 bigha 1 biswa and 19 biswansi was liable to be declared surplus as per the law laid down in the rulings mentioned above, whereas the respondents have declared a total of 19.32 acres (almost 30 bigha 19 biswa and 5 biswansi) as surplus land and have thus, deprived the petitioners their valuable right in respect of almost 16 bigha 16 biswa and 6 biswansi of land otherwise than in accordance with law.
Santosh Hazari vs Purushottam Tiwari (Dead) By Lrs on 8 February, 2001
4. The appellate court has jurisdiction to reverse or affirm the findings of the trial court. The first appeal is a valuable right of the parties and unless restricted by law, the whole case is therein open for rehearing both on questions of fact and law. The judgment of the appellate court must, therefore, reflect its conscious application of mind and record findings supported by reasons, on all the issues arising along with the contentions put forth, and pressed by the parties for decision of the appellate court. Sitting as a court of first appeal, it was the duty of the High Court to deal with all the issues and the evidence led by the parties before recording its findings. The first appeal is a valuable right and the parties have a right to be heard both on questions of law and on facts and the judgment in the first appeal must address itself to all the issues of law and fact and decide it by giving reasons in support of the findings. (Vide Santosh Hazari v. Purushottam Tiwari, (2001) 3 SCC 179 at p. 188, para 15 and Madhukar v. Sangram, (2001) 4 SCC 756 at p. 758, para 5.)
Madhukar And Ors vs Sangram And Ors on 20 April, 2001
4. The appellate court has jurisdiction to reverse or affirm the findings of the trial court. The first appeal is a valuable right of the parties and unless restricted by law, the whole case is therein open for rehearing both on questions of fact and law. The judgment of the appellate court must, therefore, reflect its conscious application of mind and record findings supported by reasons, on all the issues arising along with the contentions put forth, and pressed by the parties for decision of the appellate court. Sitting as a court of first appeal, it was the duty of the High Court to deal with all the issues and the evidence led by the parties before recording its findings. The first appeal is a valuable right and the parties have a right to be heard both on questions of law and on facts and the judgment in the first appeal must address itself to all the issues of law and fact and decide it by giving reasons in support of the findings. (Vide Santosh Hazari v. Purushottam Tiwari, (2001) 3 SCC 179 at p. 188, para 15 and Madhukar v. Sangram, (2001) 4 SCC 756 at p. 758, para 5.)