SUNIL BHADORIA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India petitioner has prayed that the proceedings under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' of 1976) in Case No. 134/84 -85/CA and 32/92 -93/B -121, 33/92 -93/B -121, 34/92 -93/B -121, 35/92 -93/B - 121, 36/92 -93/B -121 against Ram Prasad and Babulal etc. be declared to be abated by force of coming into force of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Repeal Act of 1999') w.e.f. 17.2.2000 by Gazette notification dated 10.3.2000 with further directions to respondents to correct the revenue entries of land situated in survey Nos. 155, 156, part of 207, 209,210,211, 212,214,215,208 and 213 Kita 11 area 1.769 hectare at village Jagatpura, Tahsil and District Gwalior by deleting the entry in coloumn No. 12 to the effect, 'pendency of ceiling proceedings". By amendment as per Court order dated 12.2.2014 amended relief for quashment of possession receipts Annexure P/8 and P/9 has been claimed.

(2.) ONE Devi owned different parcels of land in question being his ancestral property. Devi had two sons, namely, Kachchhu and Ramprasad, Kachchhu had three sons, namely, Babulal, Madan Singh and Gokul and two daughters namely, Munnidevi and Bhagwati (for brevity all of them are hereinafter referred to as "Babulal'). On the death of Devi, the entire land devolved upon Kachchhu and Ramprasad in the proportion of half share each. On death of Kachchhu, the same devolved upon 'Babulal' and the other half share of the ownership of Ramprasad was relinquished by him in favour of Babulal by registered relinquishment deed dated 15.11.2010. As such, Babulal became the successive owner of the entire land involved in this petition. 'Babulal' transferred the aforesaid land to petitioner and other partners by registered sale deed dated 9.11.2011.

(3.) KACHCHHU and Ramprasad were required to submit return under the provisions of section 6 of the Act of 1976. Two separate cases were registered against Kachchhu and Ramprasad. Case No.134/84 -85/CA (hereinafter referred to as the case 'A') was registered against Ramprasad and Case N0.122/83 -84/CA (hereinafter referred to as the case 'B') was registered against Kachchhu.