Search Results for "U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensat...
Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Sui...
Supreme Court Upholds Refusal to Eschew Proof Affidavit in Probate Proceedings. ...
Supreme Court Allows Agriculturists' Appeal for Enhanced Compensation; Condones ...

Search Results for "U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act"

4 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 4 result(s)

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeals in Land Exchange Dispute Under U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 — Exchange Deed Without Permission Void, But Voidable Only at Instance of Gaon Sabha or Land Holder

17 Sep 2019

The appeals arise from a judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated 5th July 2007 concerning a dispute over land rights under the Uttar Pradesh Zamind...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Land Exchange Dispute Under U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 — Exchange Deed Without Permission Held Voidable, Not Void, and Not Challengeable by Original Sellers. Original tenure holders who sold land cannot challenge subsequent exchange; limitation period for ejectment under Section 167 is six years.

17 Sep 2019

The case involves a dispute over plot no. 2902 in Village Mathura Bangar, District Mathura, U.P. Smt. Chando and Sita Ram (original tenure holders) so...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Restores Concurrent Findings of Revenue Authorities in Pond Land Dispute. High Court Exceeded Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226 by Reappreciating Evidence Without Perversity.

9 Jan 2025

The dispute pertains to Khasra No.103 (formerly Khasra No.84) in Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. In 1970, the land was recorded as 'Johad (Pond)' in revenue...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Landlord’s Appeal in U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act Dispute — ‘Held’ in Section 9 Interpreted as ‘Lawfully Held’ to Protect Ryots’ Rights Over Building Site. Court Rules that Tenants Who Temporarily Fled During Communal Riots Did Not Abandon Possession, and Landlord’s Unlawful Entry and Construction Did Not Extinguish Their Title to the Land and Building.

20 Aug 1969

The dispute concerned a village site in Nagli Abdulla, Uttar Pradesh, which the respondents, ryots under the appellants, had held for over sixty years...

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)