Allahabad Court January 2005 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Smt. Dharam Biri Vs. Dy. Director of Consolidation and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-03-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1251
Krishna Murari, J.1. Heard Sri V. S. Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Dhan Prakash appearing for respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6 and learned standing counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 3.2. The dispute relates to khata No. 73. The parties to the writ petition are related to each by following pedigree :Kallu|--------------------------------------- / /Mani Chajju/ /------------------ -----------------------/ / / /Dharam Singh Kanwal Singh Vijay Singh Siriya/ / /-------------------- Jagpal Singh -------------------/ / / / / /Satyavir Mahavir Jasbir Bhajan Babu Rajpal/-----------------------------------/ / / / Rampal Sukhpal Atal Singh Bhopal 3. During consolidation proceedings Jaipal s/o Kanwal Singh filed objection under Section 9A (2) of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (for short 'the Act') claiming 1/4th share in the disputed khata. His claim was contested by Satyavir and Mahavir s/o Dharam Singh on the ground that their uncle Kanwal Singh had executed sale deed date...
Kali Charan, Vs. Kalu and Dwarika Sons of Ganpat
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-03-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)AWC2504
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. This second appeal has been preferred by the appellants against concurrent findings of the two courts below contained in judgment and decree dated 29.5.1982 and 8.12.1982 respectively.2. Facts beyond the pale of dispute are that Plaintiff and defendants are co-tenure holders of the plots in dispute i.e. plot Nos. 169 and 170 each to the extent of one half share and both the parties had a bunch of 64 trees each in their respective shares. According to the plaint allegations, the plaintiffs being in straitened circumstances, obtained some money as loan from defendants and mortgaged the grove in lieu of money. It is further alleged that they never sold off the land but defendants illegally and fraudulently manipulated the same to one of sale of grove land while the fact remains that no sale deed for sale of land was ever executed by plaintiffs. It is in this backdrop that the plaintiffs instituted suit for the reliefs of cancellation of sale deed and for permanent in...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›