Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.32 seconds)Ram Dular vs Dy. Director Of Consolidation on 8 February, 1994
4. Scope of Section 48 after its amendment in 1968 again came up for consideration by this Court in Ram Dular vs. Dy. Director of Consolidation, Jaunpur and others (1994 Supp. (2) SCC 198). Now this Section reads as under:-
Ram Avtar & Ors vs Ram Dhani & Ors on 26 September, 1996
In support of her submission, she relied on two decisions of this court in Ram Avtar & Ors. Vs. Ram Dhani & Ors.[(1997) 2 SCC 263] and Ram Dular Vs. Dy. Director of Consolidation, Jaunpur & Ors. [JT 1994 (3) SCC 341]. From these authorities, it is clear that the Director Consolidation under Section 48 of the Act does not have the jurisdiction to interfere with the findings of fact, without any basis and on assumptions. In view of our foregoing discussion, we are, therefore, of the considered view that it was not open to the Assistant Director Consolidation, whose order was affirmed by the High Court in the impugned judgment, to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact arrived at by the Consolidation Officer as also the Settlement Officer, Consolidation.
Section 107 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 117 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Central Council For Research In ... vs Bikartan Das on 16 August, 2023
"65. Thus, from the various decisions referred to above, we have no hesitation in reaching to the conclusion that a writ of certiorari is a high prerogative writ and should not be issued on mere asking. For the issue of a writ of certiorari, the party concerned has to make out a definite case for the same and is not a matter of course. To put it pithily, certiorari shall issue to correct errors of jurisdiction, that is to say, absence, excess or failure to exercise and also when in the exercise of undoubted jurisdiction, there has been illegality. It shall also issue to correct an error in the decision or determination itself, if it is an error manifest on the face of the proceedings. By its exercise, only a patent error can be corrected but not also a wrong decision. It should be well remembered at the cost of repetition that certiorari is not appellate but only supervisory.
Sheo Nand & Ors. C vs The Deputy Director Of Consolidation ... on 3 February, 2000
11. Learned counsel also placed reliance on Sheo Nand and others Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Allahabad and others, 2000 RD 213 (SC) and the relevant paragraphs thereof are mentioned hereinafter :-
1