Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: east punjab holdings consolidation and prevention of fragmentation act 1948 Year: 2013 Page 1 of about 85 results (0.062 seconds)

Sep 02 2013 (HC)

Tarif Singh Dabas and anr. Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Sep-02-2013

..... the order dated 26th june, 2009 passed by the financial commissioner whereby respondent no. 7s revision petition under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the act, 1948) for exclusion of his land bearing khasra nos.38/6 and 38/7 situated in the extended abadi/phirni of village kanjhawala, delhi ..... is reproduced hereinbelow:1. in the year, 1993, a notification was issued under section 14 of the east punjab (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act 1948 for consolidation of holdings in village kanjhawala. on 14.11.1996, draft consolidation scheme was announced by the consolidation officer in the village. after finalising the scheme, in the year 1998, repartition was carried out under ..... section 21 of the said act. petitioner demanded a plot on the northern side of the village. his other ..... petitioner after taking note of the fact that additional land was available within the extended abadi. xxx xxx xxx 16. to give teeth to the act, delhi holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) rules 1959 have been framed. clause j of rule 6 of the rules reads as under:"(j)(i) bhumidar whose land has been included .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 13 2013 (HC)

Saroj Kumar and Others Vs. Harbans Lal and Another

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-13-2013

..... learned counsel further contended that under section 22 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948, new record of right was prepared in accordance with chapter iv of the punjab land revenue act (in short the land revenue act .).the learned counsel further contended that jurisdiction of the civil court under section 44 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act is barred. the learned counsel further contended that under section ..... district karnal. the case set up by the plaintiff was to the effect that the land in question was previously allotted to mukanda son of jawala in proceedings under east punjab holdings consolidation and prevention of fragmentation act, 1948. after his death, the suit land was mutated in favour of the plaintiff being his nearest heir and defendant no.1-hardayal singh, from whom the present appellants claim ..... the jurisdiction of the civil court is barred in rectifying the mistakes committed in the revenue record like jamabandi under section 44 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 and also under section 158 (2) (vi) of punjab land revenue act, 1887?. the learned counsel for the appellants contended that this is a legal issue and can be raised at any point of time. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 15 2013 (HC)

Present: Mr.Akash Singla Advocate for Vs. Additional Director Consolid ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-15-2013

..... order dated 26.06.1997, passed by the additional director, consolidation of holdings, punjab. counsel for the petitioners submits that consolidation concluded in 1969-70 in village moga mehla singh, tehsil and district moga. balbir singh, respondent no.2, filed a petition under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948, (hereinafter referred to as the consolidation act .).praying that as his father jangir singh was owner in ..... possession of half share, alongwith certain others.cwp no.4930 of 1998 -2- consolidation authorities have committed an error by excluding the name of jangir singh, from the missal ..... land was kept reserved and was not liable to be partitioned or included in consolidation operation, the plaintiff should have approached the consolidation authorities in this regard. the jurisdiction of civil court is barred u/s 4.of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948. more than 20 years have elapsed since consolidation took place. not after more than 20 years the plaintiff cannot be allowed to .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 02 2013 (HC)

Present: Mr. Radhe Shyam Sharma Advocate Vs. State of Haryana and Othe ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-02-2013

..... created after applying a pro-rata cut on the holdings of the proprietors in accordance with sections 18, 23-a of the east punjab holdings(consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the civil writ petition no.9371 of 2013 -3- 'consolidation act') and rule 16(ii) of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) rules, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the 'consolidation rules').a perusal of these statutory provisions reveals that ..... the land, so created and reserved, vests in the gram panchayat for management and control. section 2(g)(6) of the 1961 act ..... , as applicable to the state of haryana, (as introduced by act no.9 .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 14 2013 (HC)

Present: Mr. Arihant JaIn Advocate Vs. Joint Development Commissioner ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-14-2013

..... recorded as mushtarka malkan, i.e., land created after applying a pro rata cut on the holdings of the proprietors in accordance with section 18 and 23-a of the east punjab holding (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1948 act') and rule 16(ii) of the east punjab holding (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) rules, 1949. a perusal of these statutory provisions reveals that the land, so created and reserved ..... has any right to remain in possession of the land, in dispute, proceeded to decide the appeal in his favour, without considering the provisions of the east punjab holding (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1948 act') and the nature of mushtarka malkan land and the rights of the gram panchayat in the said land in regard to control and management. it is further ..... argued that the appellate authority has misdirected itself by holding that as the land, in dispute, is no.'shamilat deh', as per provisions of section 2(g) of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 13 2013 (HC)

Present:- Mr. Shailendra JaIn Advocate Vs. State of Haryana and Others ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-13-2013

..... p-7) and on the basis of the said sale deed, mutation was entered on 10.07.2009 in their favour. it was further pleaded that thereafter consolidation proceedings under the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 had been notified on 16.09.2009 and no shamilat deh land was mentioned and shamilat deh raqba had been duly mutated in favour of the proprietors. the ..... 23-a of the act of 1948 and rule 16(ii) of the rules of 1949 cover all such lands ..... :- i) sub-section (6) of section 2(g) of the punjab village common lands (regulation) act, 1961 and the explanation appended thereto, is only an elucidation of the existing provisions of the said act read with provisions contained in the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948; ii) the un-amended provisions of the act of 1961 and, in particular, section 2(g)(1) read with sections 18 and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 2013 (HC)

Prakash Land and Housing Corporation Vs. Financial Commissioner and or ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Feb-26-2013

..... appellants/writ petitioners being strangers have no locus standi to challenge either the gift or the allotment made to the trust. section 30 of east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948, on which reliance has been placed by the appellants, to the extent it is relevant, provides that after issue of notification under subsection ..... power to review its orders has been conferred upon the financial commissioner under east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948. in harbhajan singh (supra), supreme court had taken a view that in the absence of an express power of review, director, consolidation of holdings could not have reviewed his previous orders and, therefore, the subsequent order ..... (1) of section 14 and during the pendency of the consolidation proceedings no landowner or tenant having a right of occupancy upon whom the scheme will be binding, shall have power without the sanction of the consolidation ..... an end on 2. 24th april, 1977. on 29th september, 1975, notification under section 14 of the east punjab consolidation land holding act was issued by the lieutenant governor of delhi declaring intention to frame a scheme for consolidation. the said scheme was prepared on 16th november, 1979 and confirmed on 27th may, 1976. re-partition .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 2013 (HC)

Rajdhani Park Kalyan Karini Samiti and ors. Vs. the Financial Commissi ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Feb-26-2013

..... appellants/writ petitioners being strangers have no locus standi to challenge either the gift or the allotment made to the trust. section 30 of east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948, on which reliance has been placed by the appellants, to the extent it is relevant, provides that after issue of notification under subsection ..... power to review its orders has been conferred upon the financial commissioner under east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948. in harbhajan singh (supra), supreme court had taken a view that in the absence of an express power of review, director, consolidation of holdings could not have reviewed his previous orders and, therefore, the subsequent order ..... (1) of section 14 and during the pendency of the consolidation proceedings no landowner or tenant having a right of occupancy upon whom the scheme will be binding, shall have power without the sanction of the consolidation ..... an end on 2. 24th april, 1977. on 29th september, 1975, notification under section 14 of the east punjab consolidation land holding act was issued by the lieutenant governor of delhi declaring intention to frame a scheme for consolidation. the said scheme was prepared on 16th november, 1979 and confirmed on 27th may, 1976. re-partition .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 2013 (HC)

Charanjit Singh Bhalia and anr. Vs. the Financial Commissioner and ors ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Feb-26-2013

..... appellants/writ petitioners being strangers have no locus standi to challenge either the gift or the allotment made to the trust. section 30 of east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948, on which reliance has been placed by the appellants, to the extent it is relevant, provides that after issue of notification under subsection ..... power to review its orders has been conferred upon the financial commissioner under east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948. in harbhajan singh (supra), supreme court had taken a view that in the absence of an express power of review, director, consolidation of holdings could not have reviewed his previous orders and, therefore, the subsequent order ..... (1) of section 14 and during the pendency of the consolidation proceedings no landowner or tenant having a right of occupancy upon whom the scheme will be binding, shall have power without the sanction of the consolidation ..... an end on 2. 24th april, 1977. on 29th september, 1975, notification under section 14 of the east punjab consolidation land holding act was issued by the lieutenant governor of delhi declaring intention to frame a scheme for consolidation. the said scheme was prepared on 16th november, 1979 and confirmed on 27th may, 1976. re-partition .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 20 2013 (HC)

Cwp No.19539 of 2010 (Oandm) Vs. Suraj Bhan

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-20-2013

..... co- sharer has to be given adequate hearing?. the question formulated by the full bench reads as under:- 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 impleaded as a party and individually served therein is the spinal ..... 2010 (o&m) -2- **** order dated 13.11.2005 (annexure p-2) passed by respondent no.1- director, consolidation, haryana whereby the application under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the act .) filed by kalicharan and others respondents no.5 to 15 for separation of the khewat after partitioning the land was allowed.2 ..... issue. 11. the said view has been approved by the hon'ble apex court in civil appeal no.5994 of 1983 har parkash and others vs. additional director consolidation of holdings and others decided on 26.8.1998. the relevant observations read as under:- ....the additional director, on 9.6.1980, rejected the petition of the appellant, taking ..... over-extended and without more have been followed in the later decisions. as discussed at some length earlier the consolidation act does not envisage any formal impleading of all the co-sharers under sections 21 and 42 of the act. therefore, to read the requirement of a co-sharer being first necessarily impleaded before he can be effectively represented .....

Tag this Judgment!


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