Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: east punjab holdings consolidation and prevention of fragmentation act 1948 Year: 2002 Page 1 of about 10 results (0.043 seconds)

Apr 23 2002 (HC)

Jai Bhagwan and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Apr-23-2002

Reported in : 2002VIIAD(Delhi)644; 99(2002)DLT696; 2002(63)DRJ580

..... under-mentioned cases for the purpose of better cultivation of lands herein and in exercise f the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 14 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (east punjab act no. 50 of 1948) as extended to the union territory of delhi, the ltd. governor of the national capital territory of delhi is pleased to declare his intention to make a ..... purposes of the village. 4. the said act was extended to the union territory of delhi by an appropriate notification ..... number, are residents of village khera kalan, delhi and hold bhoomidari rights in respect of agricultural land. they are said to be members of the gaon sabha of the said village. 3. east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 was enacted to provide for the compulsory consolidation of agricultural holdings and for presenting fragmentation of agricultural holdings in the state of punjab and for assignment or reservation of land for common .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 25 2002 (HC)

Gian Chand Sharma Vs. State

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Nov-25-2002

Reported in : 2003(66)DRJ566

..... consolidation committees were constituted in 1996. the consolidation scheme in respect of both the villages was prepared in 1996 and 1998. it is alleged that the petitioner is complicity with other revenue ..... the cr.p.c. a case under section 13(1)(d) of prevention of corruption act and section 120b ipc has been registered against him. the petitioner has working as a consolidation officer of village kanjhawata & pooth khurd, delhi in june, 1996. notification under section 14(1) of east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 was issued in 1988 and 1993 in respect of these villages and the ..... or the residential plots and how many of them were sanctioned such plots. accusation is made in ignorance of the provision of the east punjab holding (consolidation and prevention fragmentation) act which has provided elaborate mechanism for preparation of the scheme for consolidation of the holding and redressal of the grievances. the provision of a 100 feet wide road was made on the demand of the village advisory committee .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 18 2002 (HC)

Satbir Singh and ors. Vs. Lt. Governor and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Sep-18-2002

Reported in : 100(2002)DLT85; 2003(66)DRJ775

..... that the notification dated 8.9.1993 under section 14(1) of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 was issued in respect of 12 villages including ..... notification dated 8 9.1993 issued by the lt. governor delhi intending to make a scheme for reconsolidation of holdings purporting to act under sub-section (1) of section 14 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act no. 50 of 1948 (as extended to delhi) (consolidation act) and also for consolidation scheme under sub-section (2) of section 14 thereof.3. the respondents in their counter affidavit have averred ..... village abadi.6. that in each village with the passage of time there is fragmentation of agricultural holdings and due to growth in the village population there is additional demand for residential land. to provide for consolidation and assignment or reservation of land for common purposes the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 was enacted. the same has been extended to the union territory of delhi vide .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 20 2002 (HC)

Madan Lal Vs. Additional Director Consolidation of Holdings and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Sep-20-2002

Reported in : (2003)133PLR399

..... face of the record being contrary to section 26 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'). in view of this, the petitioner had filed petition no. 148 of 1986 under section 42 of the act before the additional director, consolidation, punjab, for correction of the mistake and for showing the pre-consolidation entries of parat sarkar record regarding mortgage etc. in the ..... that the petitioner seeks to assail by way of this writ petition on the ground that the bar envisaged in relation to section 42 of the act is contained in rule 18 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) rules, 1949 and it would not apply to petitions where the legality or validity of the scheme prepared or confirmed or re-partition made, is ..... new record prepared during the consolidation and after examining the record, the additional .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 18 2002 (HC)

Jaipal Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Haryana, Through the Secretary, ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Sep-18-2002

Reported in : (2003)133PLR43

..... dated 25.9.2001 (annexure p-7) and order dated 29.11.2001 (annexure p-8) passed by the director, consolidation of holdings, haryana, in exercise of powers under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'), vide which a two karams passage has been provided from the land of the petitioners to the land of respondents no ..... . 3 and 4 by giving equivalent land to them in lieu of the land coming under the said passage.2. respondents no. 3 and 4 filed an application under section 42 of the act ..... before the director, consolidation of holdings for providing a passage to their land measuring69 kanals 1 maria, situated in village kachhwa, as mentioned in the petition, which they had purchased from the previous ..... by him, by filing an application under section 42 of the act. in support of his contention, the learned counsel placed reliance upon decisions of this court in nasib kaur v. the additional director, consolidation of holdings, punjab and ors., (1998-3) 120 p.l.r. 713 and banarsi doss v. director, consolidation of holdings, haryana, 1995 p.l.j. 314.4. we have considered .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 13 2002 (HC)

Nachhattar Singh and ors. Vs. State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-13-2002

Reported in : (2003)134PLR14

..... in the village in the year 1963-1964. niranjan singh and his son nacchattar singh petitioners herein filed a petition under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (for short the act) before the additional director, consolidation of holdings, punjab alleging that they had not been provided with any path to their garden and as such it was difficult for them to have access to ..... was passed by the additional director on 23.9.1966. feeling aggrieved by this order, ajmer singh respondent filed a petition challenging the said order under section 42 of the act. it was pointed out that he had not been heard while passing the order dated 23.9.1966 which adversely affected his interest. he also alleged that no path had ..... the spot it continuedto be used as a path. it was only when ajmer singh was restrained from using the samethat he filed the petition under section 42 of the act which resulted in the passing of theimpugned order. since ajmer singh was not a party it was always open to him to approach the additional director and ask for a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 13 2002 (HC)

Balbir Singh and ors., Vs. Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Sep-13-2002

Reported in : 2003(66)DRJ799

..... / direction or writ in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the respondents to conduct / carry out the consolidation proceedings strictly in accordance with the provisions of the east punjab holdings (consolidation & prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 and rules framed there under and for the object and the purpose as enshrined under the said act and the rules;(d) issue appropriate order / direction or writ in the nature of mandamus thereby ..... directing the respondents to supply the copy of draft scheme of consolidation to the petitioners and to publish the ..... notification under section 14(1) of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of frangmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as, 'the said act') was issued on 08.09.1993 for commencement of proceedings with the object of consolidation of holdings in the said village allegedly for better cultivation of land therein.according to the petitioners, the consolidation of holdings in the said village had taken place .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 17 2002 (HC)

Sambappa S/O Babappa Teli Vs. the State of Maharashtra, Through the Of ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Dec-17-2002

Reported in : 2003(4)ALLMR252; 2003(4)BomCR374

..... strong reliance on theconstitution bench judgment of the apex court in roopchand vs . state of punjab and another : air1963sc1503 . in roop chands case the apexcourt was considering certain provisions of eastpunjab holdings (consolidation and prevention offragmentation) act (punjab 50 of 1948).22. shri deshpande, learned advocate broughtto my notice the majority view whereby the apex courtwhile ..... interpreting section 42 of that act held thatunless the statute specifically provides for arevision, one cannot assume jurisdiction andentertain ..... it was clarified that thepetitioner in the case in hand, was requiredto forward the revision application beforethe cabinet minister and having not done so,nothing prevented the cabinet minister fromcalling the file for his consideration andpassing the impugned order. as alreadystated above, the rules of business readwith instructions and the standing ..... disputedportion of 3 acres 32 gunthas is held andpossessed by the appellant. the revenuerecord needs to be corrected accordingly.the lower court has erred in holding thatthe appellant claims the relief to correctthe pot hissa record. in fact, the reliefclaimed by the appellant is correction ofrecord of rights for which .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 01 2002 (HC)

Gurmeet Singh and anr. Vs. Consolidation Officer and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-01-2002

Reported in : (2003)133PLR444

..... name of individual proprietors and to re-partition the land. in this regard, reference can be made to a decision of this court in gram panchayat, jalajan v. the director, consolidation of holdings, punjab and anr., (1997-1)115 p.l.r. 600. further, whether the land in question is a bachat land or shamlat deh which vests in the gram panchayat, being ..... the name of the individual proprietors. such question can only be decided by the authorities under the act and the consolidation authority has no jurisdiction to decide such question as so held by the hon'bfe supreme court in gram panchayat, nurpur v. state of punjab and ors. (1997-2)116p.l.r. 694.10. the learned counsel for respondents no. 2 to ..... belonging to the proprietors. in the present case, the assistant consolidation officer was having no jurisdiction at all. he had changed the mutation in the name of ..... patti awana in the name of individual proprietors. he submitted that after completion of the consolidation in the village, the consolidation authorities became functus-officio and the same have no jurisdiction to change the mutations. it is for the assistant collector 1st grade under the punjab land revenue act to partition the land among the co-sharers if the land is a bachat land .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 22 2002 (SC)

Bhagwan Singh and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-22-2002

Reported in : AIR2002SC1621; 2002CriLJ2024; 2002(2)Crimes42(SC); JT2002(3)SC387; 2002(5)MPHT54; RLW2002(2)SC347; 2002(3)SCALE169; (2002)4SCC85

..... the unlawful assembly who had come on the spot and attacked the complainant party in consequence of which three precious lives were lost. the high court was, therefore, justified in holding that the accused persons, involved in the occurrence, had shared the common object.10. when the matter was again listed for re-hearing on 19th march, 2002, mr.jain, learned ..... made on the victim by a large number of persons armed with deadly weapons, it is often difficult to determine the actual part played by each offender and easy to hold that such persons attacked the victim had the common object for an offence which was known to be likely to be committed in prosecution of such an object. it is ..... if the occurrence is held to have taken place in the manner as alleged by the prosecution each of the accused is responsible for his own acts and cannot be held vicariously liable for the acts done by the other accused persons.9. common object, as contemplated by section 149 of the indian penal code, does not require prior concert or meeting ..... /s 100 ipc and their act is not punishable according to provisions of section 96 ipc'. the trial court further held, 'i find that prosecution failed to prove case beyond reasonable doubts and accused committed murder of deceased amarnath, surender and hariram and caused injuries to mukesh witness and damaged house of jagdish after throwing stones'. holding that the prosecution had failed .....

Tag this Judgment!


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