SHIV LAL Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
BOARD OF REVENUE
Click here to view full judgement.
B.S.VERMA, J. -
(1.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioners have sought a
writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the judgment and order dated
25.10.1994 (Annexure 4 to the writ petition), judgment and decree dated 29.8.1993 (Annexure -2) and the judgment and order dated 4 -2 -1980 (Annexure No.1) passed respectively by the Board of Revenue, Additional
Commissioner, Kumaun Mandal, Nainital and Assistant Collector, Bhabhar,
Haldwani, district Nainital. By the order dated 4.2.1980, the suit of the
plaintiff -petitioners, which was filed under Section 209 of the U.P. Z.A.
and L.R. Act was dismissed and by the order dated 29.8.1993, the first
appeal preferred by the plaintiff was dismissed and by order dated
25.10.1994, the second appeal filed by the plaintiff has been dismissed.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts giving rise to the present writ petition, according to the petitioners, plaintiff Kunti Devi filed a suit
for possession under Section 209 of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act (for short
the Act) against the defendants Tara Dutt, Radha Ballabh and Keshi Ram,
residents of village Kaladhungi, Tahsil Kaladhuni, district Nainital, in
the court of Assistant Collector Bhabhar, Haldwani, Nainital - respondent
no.3. The suit was filed mainly on the ground that the plaintiff is the
exclusive owner of the suit land and that the defendants have taken
illegal possession over the land of the plaintiff. The suit was resisted
by the said defendants and stand has been taken in the written statement
that the defendants were in possession over the suit land since 1960 from
the time of husband of the plaintiff and the land actually had been sold
out by the husband of the plaintiff, namely Ratan Ram. This fact finds
support from the written agreement dated 25.4.1970.
(3.) THE trial Court framed as many as six issues in the suit.
Both the parties led their evidence before the Assistant Collector. The trial Court after hearing both the parties dismissed the
suit of the plaintiff by judgment and decree dated 4.2.1980on the basis
of the findings recorded on Issue No.1 and 2 holding that the land was
handed over to the defendants by the plaintiff and her husband and
possession was delivered to them and that the defendants are in
possession of the suit land for more than 15 years. Rest of the issues
were also decided against the plaintiff.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.