Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: east punjab holdings consolidation and prevention of fragmentation act 1948 Page 11 of about 525 results (0.080 seconds)

Aug 08 1967 (HC)

Mange, S/O Nanak and anr. Vs. Additional Director, Consolidation of Ho ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1968P& H10

..... referred to as the act). respondent no. 2 then filed an application under section 42 before the director, consolidation of holdings this was forwarded by the director in march 1955 to the settlement officer. consolidation of holdings, for report. the report was sent to the director under the ..... the assistant director, consolidation of holdings. the assistant director remanded the case to the settlement officer but it was decided against respondent no. 2. it would appear that the settlement officer observed in his order that the respondent's contention could be sympathetically looked into in case he filed a revision petition under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter to be ..... signatures of the deputy commissioner who was overall in-charge of consolidation work in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 06 1957 (HC)

Fauja Singh Ram Singh and ors. Vs. Director Consolidation of Holdings, ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1958P& H305

..... of certiorari. reliance for this purpose has been placed on the observations of bishan narain j., in tara singh v. director, consolidation of holdings punjab, 59 pun lr 199: (air 1958 punj 302) (a).in that case it was held that section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 gave independent power to the state government to intervene suo motu at any stage of the ..... consolidation proceedings and the power of the government to pass any order it thought fit could not be cut down or limited by section ..... 21 of the act. it was further observed that the power exercised by the state government under section 42 was ..... and on the basis of which complete re-partition had taken place.14. for all the reasons given above, the petition will be allowed and the order of the director consolidation of holdings, punjab, dated 15-12-1956, will be quashed and it is ordered accordingly.15. the petitioners will be entitled to their costs in this court.

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 22 1968 (HC)

Karnail Singh and anr. Vs. the Additional Director, Consolidation of H ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1968P& H469

..... anything contained in chapter ix of the punjab land revenue act, 1887 except section 117 thereof, the schema prepared by the consolidation officer may provide for partition of land between joint owners of land. ..... to 7 that the question of title being raised, the consolidation authorities should stay their hands from carrying out the partition of the joint khata.3. the relevant provision of law in this matter is section 16-a of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter called 'the act'), sub-section (1) of which provides as under:--'notwithstanding ..... tindra lal j. concurring) that-'instead of any partition being effected according to the procedure laid down in chapter ix of the punjab land revenue act, the partition has to be effected by the consolidation authorities in case the share of the joint owners can be ascertained with certainty from the record-of-rights or there is ..... title is decided by a competent court. this follows from the decisions relating to section 117 of the punjab land revenue act which constitutes an exception to the other provisions of that act in section 16-a. a consolidation officer, at any rate, will not be justified in making a provision for partition of joint property in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 15 1981 (HC)

Chhaju Ram Vs. State of Haryana and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1982P& H148

..... , somewhere in oct., 1969, the gram panchayat of village mittha thal filed a petition under s. 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the act), before the state government for modification of the consolidation proceedings. in that application, it was pleaded that the extension of gujrani canal minor should have been provided for in ..... the consolidation scheme which had inadvertently been omitted and prayed that the same be provided now by passing a fresh order. ..... of limitation, the learned counsel for respondent no. 3 has invited my attention to a division bench decision of this court in haqiqat singh v. addl. director, consolidation of holdings, punjab, chandigarh, air 1981 punj & har 204 and has urged that whenever a petition under section 42 is filled against repartition the provision of limitation contained in r. ..... 2) and any petition filed beyond that period would clearly be barred by time.5. the matter of repartition of holdings or right-holdings of right-holders in the estate is of prime importance so far as consolidation act is concerned. that is why s. 21(1) provides that repartition should be proposed after obtaining the advice of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 08 1982 (HC)

Kundan Singh Vs. Additional Director, Consolidation of Holdings, Punja ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1982P& H538

..... rise thereto are these :the petitioner as also respondent no. 2 named swaran singh were right-holders in village bir pind, tehsil nakodar, district jullundur. consolidation operations under the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (for short, referred to as 'the act') took place in the village. in the due course the scheme of repartition was prepared. repartition took place on july 20, 1961. neither the ..... distinct and do not intermingle. it is only to orders passed under the act that the clog of limitation for the purposes of challenge under section 42 of the act is attached. this has been authoritatively settled by this court in haqiqat singh v. additional director, consolidation of holdings, punjab, chandigarh, (1981) 83 punj lr 472 : (air 1981 punj & har 204). thus, there is no ..... and swaran singh v. addl. director, consolidation of holdings, punjab, jullundur, 1976 pun lj 317 contends that the additional director condoned the period of limitation illegally and improperly as good merits of the case are no ground for condoning the period of limitation.it has further been asserted that admittedly the petition under section 42 of the act was time-barred and no cause .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 08 1995 (HC)

Smt. Amarjit Kaur and anr. Vs. the Additional Director, Consolidation ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (1996)114PLR217

..... department has no concern to provide a path to those lands which were purchased after the completion of consolidation proceedings. thereafter, the 3rd respondent budha singh filed an application under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 for providing a passage to him. that application was allowed .vide impugned order dated 5th march, ..... 1981 (annexure p.6), by the additional director, consolidation of holdings, punjab.4. according to the learned counsel for the petitioners the impugned order ..... plot belonging to mohinder singh, who is the maternal uncle of the petitioners. before passing the impugned order, the additional director consolidation of holdings called for a report from the consolidation officer. the consolidation officer after making a spot inspection, submitted a detailed report dated 16th february, 1981. from that report it is clear ..... singh filed an application under section 42 of the act. the high court in civil writ petition no. 885 of 1977, set aside the orders of the additional director, consolidation of holdings dated 31st august, 1976 and remanded the matter to the additional director, consolidation of holdings with a direction that the case may be decided .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 25 2003 (HC)

Jaswinder Kaur and ors. Vs. Additional Director, Consolidation and ors ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (2003)134PLR160

..... path. the challenge was also made on the ground that the respondents have not sought condonation of delay while filing a petition under section 42 of the east punjab holding (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act').4. we have heard the counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the record of the case.5. counsel for the petitioners ..... has relied upon banarsi dass and ors. v. director consolidation of holdings haryana and ors., 1995 p.l.j. 314, smt. nasib kaur v. the additional director, consolidation of holdings, punjab, (1998-3 ..... of 'clerical mistake' was moved in the year 1999, and that too, without any application for condonation of delay, after 40 years of consolidation.8. the counsel for the respondents relied upon shri jagtar singh v. additional director consolidation of holdings, punjab and anr., (1984)86 p.l.r. 364 (f.b.) to contend that the period prescribed under rule 18 will apply only .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 23 1998 (HC)

Smt. Nasib Kaur Vs. Additional Director, Consolidation of Holdings and ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (1998)120PLR713

..... 1. tara singh and maghar singh sons of sohan singh residents of village machhi ke, tehsil moga, district faridkot filed a petition under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (for short 'the act') claiming that they are the owners of certain khasra nos. in the village and that a path to the takes of the respondents therein, including the ..... the record and in that place, path in killa no. 41//12 and 13 may be provided which is already in existence. the additional director consolidation punjab in exercise of his powers under the act came to the conclusion that it was a fit case where spot can be inspected and a path which is in use on the spot should ..... , 1994 of the additional director remanding the case to the consolidation officer has become final and thus he finds no merit in the petition. ..... on receipt of the report from the kanungo, the consolidation of- ficer, mohali effected certain changes by his order dated 9th may, 1995, annexure p6. nasib kaur the petitioner in this petition aggrieved by the order of the consolidation officer filed a petition under section 42 of the act before the additional director consolidation, punjab. her petition was dismissed by order dated 12th july .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 28 1998 (HC)

Baldev Singh Vs. State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (1998)120PLR785

..... dispute. the land in dispute vests in the petitioner and the central government. petitioner filed an application under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the act) before the additional director consolidation of holdings punjab with a prayer that the land in question be shown as the ownership of the petitioner or that of the central government and ..... by deputy commissioner- cum-district collector, kapurthala and order dated 26.4.1996 annexure p5 passed by the joint development commissioner (ird) punjab ignoring the order dated 2.11.1995 annexure p1 passed by additional director consolidation of holdings, punjab, jalandhar.2. facts of the case are that the land in dispute is comprised in khewat khatauni no. 130/213, khasra no ..... therefore, the order dated 2.11.1995 is not sustainable in the eyes of law. baldev singh, petitioner filed an application under section 42 of the act before the additional director, consolidation of holdings, who accepted the same and remanded the case vide order dated 2.11.1995 annexure p1 with the direction that 'he should thoroughly scrutinise the record to ..... . l73(3-10), 174(6-0), 181(3-4), 182(6-0), 183(6-2). the case of the petitioner is that prior to consolidation the land in dispute was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 22 1999 (HC)

Gram Panchayat Vs. Addl. Director, Consolidation of Holdings and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (2000)124PLR804

..... order dated 19.1.1996 came to be passed on the application filed by right-holders, namely respondents no. 2 to 56 of village under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the act). the right-holders contended that there was a khewat in the name of shamilat deh hasab zar khewat and during ..... consolidation, instead of partitioning this land, the same was kept joint. they further contended that they being proprietors of the village, this land is required to be partitioned among them ..... was made to a division bench judgment of this court in bhagwan singh and ors. v. the director, consolidation of holdings, punjab and ors., 1997(1) p.l.j. 458. it is also contended that for filing application under section 42 of the act, no limitation is prescribed and, therefore, the additional director committed no illegality in entertaining the application. in bhagwan ..... supreme court have held that an application under section 42 of the act is not to be entertained if filed after gross delay. division bench in gram panchayat village surajpur's case (supra) quashed similar order passed by the director, consolidation of holdings. in gram panchayat nurpur v. state of punjab and ors., their lordships of the supreme court have held that .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //