declaration of the proceedings and mutation to be
null and void and also for setting aside the mutation order. The title of the
respondent ... date of
final order of mutation proceedings have been reflected from the application. Even
otherwise, the mutation order passed by the competent authority is required
JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)
[1] The Assistant Survey and Settlement Officer, Imphal West-I, passed
order dated 27.12.2005 in Mutation Case ... obtained mutation, asserting absolute rights.
[12] Though Annie Mangsatabam claimed that her brothers had knowledge of
the mutation order and that they were liable
mutation order of SDC
and order in appeal passed by SDO and hence there is
no delay from the date of knowledge of mutation order ... mutation order be set aside. The suit is
still pending. Being aggrieved by the order dated 16.05.2001 in Mutation
Case
this petition. Suffice it to
say that on consent basis the mutation orders were passed by
the Revenue Inspector ... order to hold that on the
basis of any valid conveyance deed in favour of respondents 2 to
9, the consent order of mutation
Cuttack - opp. party no. 2 against
the order dated 12.10.1989 (although no such order existed in
the Mutation Case No. 495 of 1985). The said ... Collector in the impugned order has
committed an error of record by holding that the order passed in
Mutation Appeal
Jaiswal as Bhumiswami by the Tahsildar vide order dated
28.2.2001.
4. Subsequent to passing such order of mutation on coming to know about such
mutation ... sustainability of such order, vide impugned order, Annexure P-5, set aside all
the orders of Subordinate Revenue Courts including the mutation order of
Tahsildar
date. Further criticism has been levelled on the ground that the
mutation order along with rent receipt was produced subsequently as
noticed by the tribunal ... been submitted that as
the registered deed as well as mutation order and rent receipt were not
produced by respondent no.6 till
very much present during the proceedings of the Mutation Case and
the mutation order was passed in his presence.
[3] This Court issued notice ... defendant No.3 denies that the mutation
proceeding of Mutation Case No.314 of 2013 and mutation order dated
06.04.2013 were passed
Board of Revenue vide order dated 24.08.2016 upheld the order
passed by the SDO.
4. The aforesaid order was challenged before this Court in
Writ ... this Court vide order dated
14.11.2019 set aside the orders dated 24.08.2016 passed by the
Board of Revenue and the order dated 06.01.2016 passed
assailing the order dated 25.01.2021, whereby the revision filed against the mutation order dated 19.12.2018 has been dismissed.
It is contended by learned counsel ... that:
(i) mutation proceedings are summary in nature wherein title of the parties over the land involved is not decided;
(ii) mutation order or revenue
