HAKIM ALI AND ANR. versus BOARD OF REVENUE U.P. AND ORS.

HAKIM ALI AND ANR. versus BOARD OF REVENUE U.P. AND ORS.

Section 339(c) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 makes all provisions of the Land Revenue Act, 1901, including Section 203 on arbitration, applicable to the area covered by the Act. Thus, the Board of Revenue had jurisdiction to refer the dispute in second appeal (arising out of Section 229-B suit) to arbitration, and the limitation suggested by Section 293 does not restrict this jurisdiction.

Parties
Appellant: Hakim Ali; Original Plaintiff: Badlu; Respondent No. 2: Lekhi Ram; Respondent No. 1: Board of Revenue, U.P.; Respondent No. 5 / Arbitrator: Shri Anup Singh
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
19 December 1990
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Decision by Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Arbitration, Jurisdiction of Revenue Courts, Applicability of Land Revenue Act Provisions, 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hakim Ali

Appellant

Badlu

Original Plaintiff

Lekhi Ram

Respondent No. 2

Board of Revenue, U.P.

Respondent No. 1

Shri Anup Singh

Respondent No. 5 / Arbitrator

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Decision by Supreme Court

  1. 1 Whether the Board of Revenue is competent to refer a dispute relating to bhumidhari rights to arbitration under Section 229-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950
  2. 2 Applicability and scope of Sections 203, 293, and 339(c) of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 and U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950

Ratio Decidendi

Section 339(c) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 makes all provisions of the Land Revenue Act, 1901, including Section 203 on arbitration, applicable to the area covered by the Act. Thus, the Board of Revenue had jurisdiction to refer the dispute in second appeal (arising out of Section 229-B suit) to arbitration, and the limitation suggested by Section 293 does not restrict this jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.