other
rights", has rejected the entry. Once again, entry no.24519 was mutated
in the revenue record on 13.04.2011, the same was also rejected ... remained unchallenged. Therefore, the
first entry 9285 dated 15.02.1964 so also entry no.15311 were mutated
in succession, without there being any objection
other
rights", has rejected the entry. Once again, entry no.24519 was mutated
in the revenue record on 13.04.2011, the same was also rejected ... remained unchallenged. Therefore, the
first entry 9285 dated 15.02.1964 so also entry no.15311 were mutated
in succession, without there being any objection
number 12838 was mutated in the
revenue record on 26.4.2007 in favour of Laxmiben recording
the heirship. Mutation of the said entry was objected ... name mutated in the revenue
records. The reasons given in the impugned order
dated 04.02.2014 of the Mamlatdar for not mutating
the entry and insisting
petitioner had applied for mutation of the entry;
however, it appears, that the entries were mutated ... revenue
record namely entry no.3223 dated 03.12.1999, entry no.3334
dated 25.10.2002 and entry no.3413 dated 03.10.2003; however,
the entries were rejected
dated
22.10.1997 that the entry No.7590 is certified on 25.11.1997. It is
recorded that entry no.7590, has been mutated on the basis ... adverse possession. After
the entry no.7590, there were other two entries nos. 7609 and 7693
mutating the heirship and deleting the name of Bhalaji
submitted
that everything was known to the respondent authorities, for,
mutation entries were posted in the revenue record and nothing was
suppressed ... Mamlatdar, Daskroi and Deputy Collector,
Viramgam Prant respectively, so also consequential mutation entry
nos.5664 and 5665 both dated 18.02.1994 posted in the revenue
record
plaint, it cannot be said that the plaintiff
knew about the mutation entry since long and to ascertain such
aspect and pleadings, evidence is required ... suit. Also, the precise date of discovery
of the documents; mutation entries and the sale deeds, are
deliberately not mentioned, keeping the pleadings vague, only
executed in the year 2006, entry no.8725 was posted in the revenue
record; similarly, entry no.10521 was mutated in the revenue record ... Patel,
initially heirship entry no.2551 was posted in the revenue record
and subsequently on 08.11.1987, entry no.3497 was mutated and
the names
land to
the petitioner No.1 and on the basis whereof, mutation Entry
No.1142 dated 4.7.1990 came to be posted in the revenue
record ... years, cancelling the Entry No.1142
dated 4.7.1990 and certified on 26.8.1990, .
11. Apparently the entry no.1142 was mutated in the
revenue record
land to
the petitioner No.1 and on the basis whereof, mutation Entry
No.1142 dated 4.7.1990 came to be posted in the revenue
record ... years, cancelling the Entry No.1142
dated 4.7.1990 and certified on 26.8.1990, .
11. Apparently the entry no.1142 was mutated in the
revenue record
