REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Baijnath Dwivedi Appellant

V/S

Shiv Govind Agnihotri Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

MEYERS V. CASEY [REFERRED TO]
L.J. IN R. V. KENSINGTON INCOME TAX COMMISSIONERS. [REFERRED TO]
K S RASHID AND SON VS. INCOME TAX INVESTIGATION COMMISSION [REFERRED TO]
A V VENKATESWARAN COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS BOMBAY VS. RAMCHAND SOBHRAJ WADHWANI [REFERRED TO]
HARI NARAIN VS. BADRI DAS [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRA BHAN GOSAIN VS. STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
THUNGABHADRA INDUSTRIES LIMITED VS. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
TILOKCHAND AND MOTICHAND VS. H B MUNSHI [REFERRED TO]
JAI SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
WELCOM HOTEL VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
G NARAYANASWAMY REDDY VS. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
SHANKER MOTIRAM NALE VS. SHIOLALSING GANNUSING RAJPUT [REFERRED TO]
S P CHENGALVARAYA NAIDU VS. JAGANNATH [REFERRED TO]
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. A P JAISWAL [REFERRED TO]
DWARKA PRASAD AGARWAL VS. B D AGARWAL [REFERRED TO]
ZEE TELEFILMS LTD VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
JAI NARAIN PARASURAMPURIA VS. PUSHPA DEVI SARAF [REFERRED TO]
BHAGUBHAI DHANABHAI KHALASI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
ARUNIMA BARUAH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
PRESTIGE LIGHTS LTD VS. STATE BANK OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
MANOHAR SHANKAR NALE VS. JAIPALSING SHIVLALSING RAJPUT [REFERRED TO]
DALIP SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]
RAMJAS FOUNDATION VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
DSR STEEL P LTD VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
BUSSA OVERSEAS & PROPERTIES P LTD VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed against the order dtd. 12/2/2020 passed by Additional Commissioner, Rewa Division, Rewa Link Court Satna/Sidhi in Case No.1065/Appeal/2017-18.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that he had purchased the disputed land bearing Khasra No.89/2 situated at Village Bansa, Tahsil Huzur, District Rewa from one Shri Munnalal Agnihotri by a registered sale deed dtd. 26/5/2016. Shri Munnalal Agnihotri has expired and his legal representatives are respondents No.6 to 9. The petitioner moved an application for mutation of his name on the basis of the sale deed. Vendor/Shri Munnalal Agnihotri also filed his reply and admitted the sale of property in question and expressed his no objection to the mutation of name of the petitioner. Thereafter, a public notice was issued inviting objection in respect of mutation and accordingly, respondent No.1 to 5 submitted their objections on the ground that Khasra No.89/2 and its adjoining lands i.e. khasra Nos.86, 87, 88 and 90 are their joint family properties and the sale deed has been executed without the partition of the properties. After considering the objections raised by respondents Nos.1 to 5, the Tehsildar allowed the application filed by the petitioner and directed for mutation of name of the petitioner in place of Shri Munnalal Agnihotri. While deciding the application, it was held by the Tehsildar that the land in dispute exclusively belongs to Shri Munnalal Agnihotri and there is nothing on record to show that it is a Joint Hindu Family property.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the order of mutation dtd. 26/9/2017 respondents No.1 to 5 preferred an appeal before the Court of S.D.O. Tehsil Huzur, District Rewa.

Click here to view full judgment.

BAIJNATH DWIVEDI Vs. SHIV GOVIND AGNIHOTRI

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address