Search Results for "revenue mutation"

956 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 956 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Gujarat Dismisses State Appeal Against Acquittal in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Trap Witness. Demand and Acceptance of Bribe Not Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The State of Gujarat filed an appeal under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of acquittal dated...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Condonation of 50-Year Delay in Land Revenue Appeal — Unreasonable Delay Not Explained. Superintendent of Land Records lacked jurisdiction to condone inordinate delay under Section 247 of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 without proper cause.

The case involves a writ petition filed by M/s. Aluwid Architectural Private Ltd and others (petitioners) challenging an order dated 6 September 2022 ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Quashing Reservation Condition in Development Permission Dispute. MHADA Housing Reservation Deleted by Sanctioned Modification to Development Plan, Municipal Corporation Cannot Insist on Compliance.

The petitioner, Cosmos Constructions, a partnership firm, owned land at Chitalsar, Manpada, Thane. The Thane Municipal Corporation (TMC) imposed Condi...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay Allows Appeal in Civil Suit Remand Case — Remand Order Set Aside as Appellate Court Exceeded Jurisdiction Under Order 41 Rule 23A CPC. The appellate court cannot remand a suit for retrial when the trial court has already decided it on merits without any procedural irregularity.

The appeal arises from a judgment and order dated 22 March 2022 passed by the District Judge, Raigad, setting aside the judgment and decree dated 22 A...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal Against Remand Order in Civil Suit — Appellate Court Exceeded Powers Under Order 41 Rule 23-A CPC. Remand Without Setting Aside Trial Court's Findings on Merits Is Not Permissible Under Order 41 Rule 23-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

The present appeal arises from an order of remand passed by the Appellate Court (District Court) in a civil suit. The appellants, who were the origina...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutional Validity of Sections 14 and 17 of Maharashtra Slum Act in Land Acquisition Challenge. Challenge to Acquisition Under Section 14 and Award Under Section 17 Rejected as Provisions Held Intra Vires Constitution.

The petitioners, Nenshi Monji (Bombay), a Family Trust and Others, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the acquisi...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Second Appeal Due to Procedural Error in Not Framing Points for Determination by Lower Appellate Court. Partition Decree Set Aside and Remanded for Fresh Disposal Under Order 41 Rule 31 CPC.

The case arises from a partition suit (Regular Civil Suit No.4 of 1986) filed by the respondents (original plaintiffs) against the appellant (original...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Second Appeal in Partition Suit, Sets Aside Concurrent Findings on Oral Partition. Court holds that finding of oral partition in 1958 was perverse and that the Appellate Court erred in assuming that the eldest son acted as Karta during father's lifetime.

The case involves a second appeal arising from a partition suit. The appellants, legal representatives of the original plaintiff Shankar Ganpati Jagta...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition and Second Appeal in Land Revenue Dispute — Upholds Concurrent Findings on Mutation Entry Validity. The court held that mutation entries do not confer title and that the Civil Court's decree regarding possession was binding on revenue authorities.

The case involves a land dispute between the petitioners (legal heirs of Dattu Appa Patil) and respondent 3 (Rama Yesaba Patil) over mutation entries ...