DHARAM SINGH (D) THR. LRS. & ORS. versus PREM SINGH (D) THR. LRS.

DHARAM SINGH (D) THR. LRS. & ORS. versus PREM SINGH (D) THR. LRS.

Where competent authority, upon finding that the name of the claimant was entered surreptitiously/fraudulently in revenue records, has ordered deletion of that entry, such person cannot claim Asami or Sirdari rights under Section 10(e) of the 1960 Act. Further, a Patwari is not competent to confer such status by entry in revenue records; only orders by competent authority can have legal effect. As the plaintiff’s predecessor’s right was not supported by competent authority nor formed part of the land retained (4 Nali) after escheatment, no legal right in the suit property was established.

Parties
Appellant: Dharam Singh (D) Thr. Lrs. & Ors.; Respondent: Prem Singh (D) Thr. Lrs.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
05 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appellate Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Permanent Injunction, Sirdari/asami Rights, Escheatment of Land, Revenue Records, Statutory Interpretation
Property Law Land Tenure Civil Procedure Permanent Injunction Sirdari/asami Rights Escheatment of Land Revenue Records Statutory Interpretation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dharam Singh (D) Thr. Lrs. & Ors.

Appellant

Prem Singh (D) Thr. Lrs.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appellate Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiff acquired Sirdari/Asami rights over Plot No. 719 under Section 10(e) of the Kumaon and Uttarakhand Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1960 based on revenue records.
  2. 2 Whether an entry made by a Patwari in revenue records, unsupported by competent authority, can confer Sirdari/Asami rights.
  3. 3 Whether the property in question was validly escheated to the State and given to the defendants in exchange.

Ratio Decidendi

Where competent authority, upon finding that the name of the claimant was entered surreptitiously/fraudulently in revenue records, has ordered deletion of that entry, such person cannot claim Asami or Sirdari rights under Section 10(e) of the 1960 Act. Further, a Patwari is not competent to confer such status by entry in revenue records; only orders by competent authority can have legal effect. As the plaintiff’s predecessor’s right was not supported by competent authority nor formed part of the land retained (4 Nali) after escheatment, no legal right in the suit property was established.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No merit found in the appeal, appeal is dismissed.