Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: east punjab holdings consolidation and prevention of fragmentation act 1948 Page 5 of about 525 results (0.049 seconds)

Oct 24 1989 (SC)

Gram Panchayat, Village Kanonda Vs. Director, Consolidation of Holding ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1990SC763; JT1989(4)SC357; 1989(2)SCALE914; 1989Supp(2)SCC465; [1989]Supp1SCR576

..... of 1948), hereinafter referred to as 'the act'. the panchayat, therefore, moved an application under section 42 of the act on 20-9-1977 for setting aside the scheme, objecting to the utilisation of the land of value of -/2/- (two ..... , consolidation of holdings dated 8-2-1979.2. the appellant gram panchayat, here-in after referred to at the 'panchayat', was the owner of 1200 bighas of land in village kanonda, tehsil bahadurgarh, district rohtak. a scheme of consolidation of holdings, hereinafter referred to as 'the scheme', of the village was confirmed on 15-1-1974 under section 20 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (50 ..... after the commencement of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) second amendment and validation act, 1962 may within 60 days of that order appeal to the assistant director of consolidation and under sub-section (5) any appeal against an order of the settlement ' officer (consolidation) pending under sub-section (4) immediately before the commencement of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) second amendment and validation act, 1962, either before the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 12 1996 (HC)

Gram Panchayat Vs. the Additional Director, Consolidation and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (1997)115PLR391

..... of consolidation. according to ujagar singh and other right holders, after utilising the land for common purposes of the village in the wake of imposition ..... corrected even after a lapse of quarter of a century or so. the action does not become in any way illegal or contrary to the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948.8. in gram panchayat gunia majri v. director, consolidation of holdings and ors. (supra) the right holders had sought re-distribution of the panchayat land through petition under section 42 made by them to the ..... of the village, the consolidation authorities imposed a pro-rata cut on all the right holders of the village. imposition of pro-rata cut on the right holders of the village for the common purposes of the village, is permissible under the provisions of section 18 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act,1948 (hereinafter referred to as the act no. 50 of 1948) in the scheme .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 16 1981 (HC)

Haqiqat Singh Vs. the Additional Director, Consolidation of Holdings, ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1981P& H204

..... in consonance with the conclusion of a number of single bench judgment of this court :-whether the bar of limitation created by rule 18 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) rules, 1949, would also operate when a petition under s. 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948, is filed impugning only the scheme prepared or confirmed of repartition made by any officer under the ..... village singh, district rupar. on august 31, 1977, this respondent filed an application under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948(for short, the act) for the provision of a link passage to the said kurrah or block of land. the additional director, consolidation of holdings, punjab, after giving due notice and hearing to the petitioner, provided the requisite passage to the land of the ..... act? in other words, whether rule 18 would apply to the facts of a case whether no specific order of any of the authorities passed under the act is the subject matter of challenge in a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 01 1983 (HC)

Biru and anr. Vs. Suraj Bhan and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1983P& H347

..... highlight that we are called upon to consider this issue (formulated in the opening part of the judgment) within the specific confines of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948(hereinafter the called the act). that this statute is part of a larger scheme of progressive agrarian legislation, does not seem to be in doubt. its primarily object ..... s.s. sandhawalia, c.j.1. whether proceedings under section 21 and 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 envisage that each one of the co-sharers who have joint and indivisible rights must be impugned as a party and individually served ..... .2. the matrix of facts directly relevant to the question may be noticed briefly. consolidation proceedings in village karsindhu, tehsil narwana provides the base for this protracted litigation. the consolidation officer under section 21 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, hereinafter called the act, proposed allotment of abadi plot no. 644 to telu, mange and biru and abadi ..... proper. (4) any person aggrieved by the order of settlement officer (consolidation under sub-section (3), whether made before or after the commencement of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) second amendment and validation act, 1962, may within sixty days of that order, appeal of the assistant director of consolidation. (5) to (7) xxx xxx '42. the state government .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 04 1996 (HC)

Gram Panchayat Vs. the Director, Consolidation of Holdings and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (1997)115PLR600

..... the various demands of village community. as per averments made in c.w.p. no. 9205 of 1992 consolidation of holding of this village took place in the year 1952-53. under section 14 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 government can of its own accord or on an application declare its intention to make a scheme for ..... consolidation of holdings in such estate or estates or part thereof as may be specified. on publication in the estate concerned, government is to appoint a consolidation officer who after obtaining in ..... 's case (supra) the court was considering the matter in the light of provisions contained in section 2(bb) 23-a and 18 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, the order of additional director vide which some land which was reserved for common purposes by imposing a pro rata cut which was being given to ..... certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the order dated 7.4.1992 passed by director of land records, punjab, exercising the powers under section 42 of the east punjab consolidation of holdings (prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948. in the connected writ petition bearing no. 9205 of 1992 bhagwan singh and others have sought issuance of a writ of mandamus, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 24 1989 (SC)

The Gram Panchayat, Village Kanonda Vs. Director, Consolidation of Hol ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1990SC763; JT1989(4)SC357; 1989(2)SCALE914; 1989Supp(2)SCC465; 1989(1)SCR576(Supp)

..... referred to as 'the act'. the panchayat, therefore, moved an application under section 42 of the act on september 20, 1977 for setting aside the scheme, objecting to the utilisation of the land of value of - /2/- (two ..... director, consolidation of holdings dated february 8, 19792. the appellant gram panchayat, hereinafter referred to as the 'panchayat', was the owner of 1200 bighas of land in village kanonda, tehsis bahadurgarh, district rohtak. a scheme of consolidation of holdings, hereinafter referred to as 'the schedule', of the village was confirmed on january 15, 1974 under section 20 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (50 of 1948), hereinafter ..... after the commencement of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) second amendment and validation act, 1962 may within 60 days of that order appeal to the assistant director of consolidation and under sub-section (5) any appeal against an order of the settlement officer (consolidation) pending under sub-section (4) immediately before the commencement of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) second amendment and validation act, 1962, either before the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 29 1996 (HC)

Basant Singh Vs. the State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (1996)113PLR430

..... dated 13.12.1979 has become final and respondents no. 2 and 3 did not challenge that order, but instead they filed an application under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act 1948 and the order dated 28.1.1981 came to be passed on the said application. according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the additional director has no power ..... of appeal or in the writ proceedings. on the other hand, the 3rd respondent filed an application under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948, on 24.1.1980 to abolish the path. on that application, the additional director, consolidation of holdings, punjab, chandigarh held that the path does not lead anywhere and, therefore, allowed the application filed by the said respondent and abolished ..... for running along killa no. 55/3/4. thereafter on 26.7.1979 i.e. nearly 20 years after finalisation of the consolidation proceedings, the 2nd respondent (jagjit singh) made an application under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948, praying that the passage running along his killa no. 55/3/4/ be cancelled. that application was dismissed by the additional director .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 19 1969 (HC)

Ajit Singh Vs. Smt. Subaghan and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1970P& H93

..... numbers were sold to ajit singh appellant. 2. sometime in 1961 proceedings for consolidation of holdings started in village barod in consequence of a notification under section 14 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (east punjab act 50 of 1948). in the course of the preparation of the scheme of consolidation on february 5, 1964, the mukhtar or attorney of respondent 1 raised an objection ..... of land at any time. so he dismissed ajit singh appellant's application under section 36 of east punjab act 50 of 1948. against that order there was an application under section 42 of that act by ajit singh appellant to the director of consolidation of holdings, respondent 3. after referring to the co-ownership of respondent 1 and her son ranjit singh ..... shall be deemed to be extinguished.' the whole of chapter ix of the punjab land revenue act, 1887. (punjab act 17 of 1887), is not to apply to any matter of partition during the consolidation of holdings after a notification under sub-section (1) of section 14 of east punjab act 50 of 1948, but to that the exception is section 117 or the first-mentioned ..... case was followed and the approach prevailed. so even when an officer under east punjab act 50 of 1948 decides that no question of title arises before him and proceeds to make a provision for partition in a scheme of consolidation of holdings and during the course of consolidation of holdings no step is taken by a person aggrieved to file a suit to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 01 1969 (HC)

Hardial Singh and ors. Vs. Director of Consolidation of Holdings, Punj ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1970P& H261

..... of the petitioners, in the area of the adjoining village chokhar along the land allotted in repartition to respondent 4. in an application under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (east punjab act 50 of 1948), respondent 4 sought relief that the path provided to the land of santa singh be deleted because another path is available from village khandoor to village cho-khar ..... authority to make an order which is contrary to the scheme without amending the scheme. the scheme could have been ordered to be amended under section 36 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948. no such order was ever made. as stated before, no objections were ever filed or have been shown to have been filed to the scheme as confirmed, and the ..... . respondent 2, additional director of consolidation of holdings, accepting the application of respondent 4, set aside the order of respondent 3, settlement officer, of november 18, 1964, whereby the path in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 03 1972 (HC)

Ranbir Singh and anr. Vs. Mangal Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1972P& H274

..... to transfer or otherwise deal with any portion of his original holding so as to affect the rights of any other landowner under the scheme of consolidation'.section 30 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the punjab act) exactly corresponds to section 29 of the pepsu act.2. in the case before us on 3rd july, 1956 a notification under sub-section (1 ..... ) of s. 14 of the pepsu act was published in the official gazette. this notification was ..... is appointed, it was observed by the learned judge as follows:--'the mere issue of the notification under section 14(1) of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, without any further step having been taken will not make the consolidation proceedings pending in the village'.13. there can be no quarrel with these observations as such, but the learned judge nowhere discussed the question .....

Tag this Judgment!


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