Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: east punjab holdings consolidation and prevention of fragmentation act 1948 Year: 2012 Page 1 of about 24 results (0.060 seconds)

Feb 21 2012 (HC)

Randhir Singh and Another Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and Others

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Feb-21-2012

..... put to a limited notice of examining as to whether there is violation of the provisions of section 23(2) of east punjab holding (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 and rule 16 of delhi holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) rules 1959.16. in light of the afore-going narration, it becomes crystal clear that there is no violation of ..... for the petitioners at the first hearing in these matters that the issue of violation of section 23(2) of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 and rule 16 of delhi holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) rules 1959 was urged before the financial commissioner, but the same has not been considered in the impugned order, ..... respondents. thus, it is asserted by learned counsel for the respondents that there is no violation of section 23 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act , 1948 or rule 16 of delhi holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) rules 1959, and so, the decisions reported in hukam chand shyam lal vs. union of india (uoi) and ors., ..... by the petitioners, there is no denial that they were served by way of affixation before being proceeded against under section 23 of the east punjab holding (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948. having not done so, petitioners cannot legitimately assert that they stand prejudiced merely because the order of 20/24th march, 2009 has been .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 13 2012 (HC)

Bhagwan Singh Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and Another

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Apr-13-2012

..... proceedings took place which had compelled the petitioner to file a petition under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948, seeking direction for early disposal of the aforesaid application of the petitioner. parawise comments were made by the concerned tehsildar/consolidation officer in response to the aforesaid petition, which has been dismissed by the financial commissioner, delhi ..... construction of bijwasan drain, in pursuance to the notification issued in november, 1974 under section 4 of land acquisition act, 1894, which was followed by an award no.51/86-87, wherein pre-consolidation as well as post-consolidation number of the acquired land including the subject land were detailed. the stand taken by the petitioner in his ..... application (annexure p-2) seeking cancellation/withdrawal of the subject land from acquisition, before the concerned consolidation officer was that the subject land was not acquired in pursuance to notification of november, 1974 under section 4 of the land acquisition act, 1894 and the same is found to be factually incorrect as award no.51/86-87, ..... application (annexure p-2), as the remedy with the petitioner upon acquisition of the subject land, was to file application under section 30/31 of the land acquisition act, 1894 against the predecessor-in-interest/recorded owners of the subject land. thus, while finding petitioners application (annexure p-2) to be misdirected, this petition is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 26 2012 (HC)

Counsel for the Petitioners Fairly Concedes That the Vs. Nagar Panchay ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-26-2012

..... was adjourned sine-die on 20.03.2009, to await the final out come of a bunch of writ petitions, challenging the vires of section 42-a of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948. the writ petition was put for hearing before us on 03.10.2012 and the following order was passed:- counsel for the petitioners fairly concedes that the controvers.in ..... case is covered against the petitioners but states that apart from the fact that the petition under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the 'consolidation act').has been dismissed on the ground that section 42-a of the consolidation act provides that such a petition shall not be entertained, the petitioners had a right to file a petition under section ..... are of the opinion that the petitioners had no right to file a petition under section 42 of the consolidation act, as the land, in dispute, was created during consolidation under sections 18 and 23-a of the consolidation act and rule 16(ii) of the east punjab holdings (consolidation & prevention of fragmentation) rules, 1949. the land being jumla mushtarka malkan, vests in the gram panchayat for management and control. cwp .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 11 2012 (HC)

Present: Mr. Deepak Balyan Advocate Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-11-2012

..... , bahadurgarh, to conduct proceedings under civil writ petition no.21139 o 2. section 21 (1) of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the consolidation act .).i.e., proceedings of re-partition whereby possession is to be changed. the public notices issued by proclamation are a mere `sham' as the petitioners were never informed about these ..... and validation act, civil writ petition no.21139 o ..... 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 to the assistant director of consolidation. (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 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 20 2012 (HC)

C.W.P. No. 6869 of 1986 Vs. Joint Director Panchayats-cum-commissioner ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-20-2012

..... i.e.land created during consolidation by applying a pro rata cut on the holdings of the proprietors.in accordance with sections 18 and 23-a of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (for brevity, 'the 1948 act') and rule 16 (ii) of east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) rules, 1949 (for ..... brevity, 'the 1949 rules').a presumption, therefore, arises that the land, in dispute, was reserved for common purposes. the presumption can, however, be rebutted by adducing clear and cogent c.w.p.no.6869 of 1986 and other connected cases 5 evidence, particularly a document prepared during consolidation ..... . the petitioners have not referred to the consolidation ..... excess of the land which was assigned or reserved for common purposes of the village under section 18 of the 1948 act. the petitioners have relied upon the judgment and decree of the civil court in civil suit no.524 of 14 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 13 2012 (HC)

Bundi Ram (Deceased) Through His Lrs Vs. Commissioner, Ambala Division ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-13-2012

..... thereto; (6) lands reserved for the common purposes of a village under section 18 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (east punjab act 50 of 1948), the management and control whereof vests in the gram panchayat under section 23-a of the aforesaid act. explanation.- lands entered in the column of ownership of record of rights as jumla malkan ..... ponds situated within the sabha area as defined in clause (mmm) of section 3 of the punjab gram panchayat act, 1952, excluding lands reserved for the common purposes of a village under section 18 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation)act, 1948 (east punjab act 50 of 1948), the management and control whereof vests in the state government under section 23-a of the ..... aforesaid act. (4a) vacant land situate in abadi deh or gorah deh not owned by any person. (5) ..... dispute becomes or has become shamilat deh due to river action or that land in shamilat deh was reserved for making good loss in proprietary holdings, by river action. the judgment punjab state versus gram panchayat, mallah, 978 plj, page 138 (supra), has been pressed into service by the petitioners, to contend that if .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 07 2012 (HC)

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajive Bhalla Vs. Joint Development Co ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-07-2012

..... malkan and digar haqdaran hasab rasad raqba' i.e.land created during consolidation by applying pro rata cut on the holdings of proprietors.in accordance with sections 18 and 23-a of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (in short, 'the 1948 act') and rule 16 (ii) of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) rules 1949 (in short, 'the 1949 rules').a perusal of these ..... not vest in the gram panchayat. counsel for the respondent-gram panchayat, on the other hand, submits that as the land is 'jumla mushtarka malkan' created during consolidation, the management and control of the land vests in the gram panchayat. it has been further argued that the petitioners have failed to establish their right, title or ..... development and panchayat officer, amritsar and order dated 10.04.2011 (annexure p6).passed by the joint development commissioner (ird).punjab (exercising the powers of commissioner under the punjab public premises and land (eviction and rent recovery) act, 1973. counsel for the petitioners has submitted that respondent no.3/gram panchayat filed a petition under sections 4, 5 ..... and 7 of the punjab public premises and land (eviction and rent recovery) act, 1973 civil writ petition no.5514 o 2. (hereinafter referred as 'the 1973 act').for eviction of the petitioners as well as for recovery of damages. the petition was allowed by the collector by, holding that the land, in dispute is 'jumla .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 29 2012 (HC)

Present: Mr. Roshan Lal Sharma Advocate Vs. Joint Director, Panchayat, ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-29-2012

..... malkan ., i.e., land created during consolidation by applying a pro rata cut on the holdings of proprietors.in accordance with sections 18 and 23-a of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the 194. act .) and rule 16 (ii) of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) rules, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the ..... 194. rules .).which read as follows: 1. lands reserved for common purposes.-- notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force , it shall be lawful for the consolidation ..... and order dated 29.8.1986 passed by the joint director, panchayat, exercising the powers of the `commissioner', punjab, chandigarh under the punjab village common lands (regulation) act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 1961 act .) counsel for the petitioners submits that land situated in rectangle no.3, bearing khasr.no.25/1, is ..... petitioners on 22.5.1966. the gram panchayat filed a petition under section 11 of the 1961 act, claiming ownership of this land. the application was allowed by the collector by holding that the land vests in the gram panchayat. an appeal filed by the petitioners was dismissed arbitrarily .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 17 2012 (HC)

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-17-2012

..... during consolidation reflects a compromise between co-sharers and a consequent partition has not been incorporated in the revenue record, necessary correction be made. the ..... 05.05.1998 passed by the director, consolidation, punjab, mohali, and the consolidation officer, mohali, punjab, respectively. the petitioner purchased a part of the land, in dispute, on 02.04.1997, for valuable consideration, from karam singh. respondent nos.4 to 11 filed a petition, under section 42 of the east punjab holding (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948, (hereinafter referred to as the '1948 act') praying that as resolution no.252 recorded ..... owners.as per their possession of land, in dispute, at the time of consolidation. the only question that arises for consideration is whether the additional director, consolidation could rectify the revenue record prepared during consolidation, 40 years after conclusion of consolidation proceedings and, if so, to what extent. section 42 the 1948 act postulates that the state may at any time ., examine the correctness of any .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 16 2012 (HC)

Risala and Others Vs. State of Haryana and Another

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-16-2012

..... as the error came to the notice of dewa singh in 1982, a petition was filed immediately. it is also submitted that as section 42 of the east punjab holdings ( consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the 1948 act .) uses the expression at any time ., a correction may be applied for and ordered at any time. we have heard counsel for the parties, ..... perused the impugned order. the dispute in the present case relates to ownership of land of thola dakhu, stated to be in possession of proprietors in accordance with their share holdings ..... . the land, in dispute, is, admittedly, used as a pond and for tethering cattle. the order passed by the director consolidation, ordering correction in the revenue record, has not adversely effected the rights of parties as an entry in the ..... decree dated 28.8.1984, passed in a suit filed by dewa singh, holding that the petitioners are owners by advers.possession, c.w.p.no.5319 of 1986 -2- has not been considered by the director consolidation thereby rendering the correction ordered by the director consolidation contrary to the civil court decree. it is prayed that in this view of .....

Tag this Judgment!


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