Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
29 judgments · newest first · showing 1–29
The appellant, a Tehsildar, passed a land settlement order in 1997 which was later alleged to be illegal, leading to a show‑cause notice in 2009 and a chargesheet in 2011 after a 13‑year delay. The appellant challenged the chargesheet under the Judges Protection Act, 1985, arguing that the order was …
The State of Madhya Pradesh filed a criminal appeal challenging the High Court's order that quashed FIR No. 551 of 2015, which alleged offences under Sections 420, 466, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC relating to fraudulent sale of government land. The dispute originated from a civil suit over possession …
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., a secured creditor, sought possession of mortgaged assets of One Mission Vivacare under the SARFAESI Act after the borrower defaulted. The District Magistrate ordered possession, but the Naib Tehsildar refused, invoking a recovery award under the MSMED Act. The High Court …
The Supreme Court examined whether a temple priest (Pujari) could be deemed a Bhumiswami under the Madhya Bharat Land Revenue and Tenancy Act, 2007 and the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, and whether the State could, by executive circulars, delete the priest's name from revenue records and insert …
The appellant, BAJRANGA (deceased) represented by legal heirs, challenged the State of Madhya Pradesh's declaration of his agricultural land as surplus under the Madhya Pradesh Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960. He argued that a portion of the land had been decreed in favour of his …
The plaintiffs, successors of an ex‑Zamindar, sued the State of Madhya Pradesh seeking declaration of Bhumiswami rights and a permanent injunction, claiming that the disputed land was Khud‑kasht (personally cultivated) and therefore exempt from vesting under the Madhya Bharat Zamindari Abolition …
The respondents-plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration of title and possession of several khasra lands, alleging that their fathers were lessees under a patta-lease. The appellants-defendants contended that the land had been auctioned in 1929 to their grandfather Gaya Din, who obtained a valid …
The appellant’s predecessor sold tribal agricultural land to the respondent’s predecessor in 1964. After the 1980 amendment inserting Section 170B of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, the appellant’s successor (Beniram) sought reversion of the land, and the Collector ordered the land restored to …
The Supreme Court examined the renewal of a 30‑year lease granted by the Ujjain Development Authority (UDA) to Mis Ajar Enterprises Private Limited (Ajar) after the leasehold interest was acquired from the liquidated IISCO. The Court held that Rule 24 and Rule 25 of the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha …
Maharani Ushadevi, claiming to be the heir of the former Maharaja of Holkar, filed a suit seeking declaration of title and a permanent injunction over several birs, alternatively asserting Bhumiswami status under Section 158(2) of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code. The State of Madhya Pradesh …
The State of Madhya Pradesh claimed ownership of 45 bighas of land acquired in 1946 for an industrial area, which had been leased to the plaintiff Nomi Singh for one year in 1951. The plaintiffs asserted title as Bhumiswamis based on an alleged oral patta from the former Zamindar and later pleaded …
The appellants were allotted surplus agricultural land by the State of Madhya Pradesh in 1973 under Section 35 of the Madhya Pradesh Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960, which conferred Bhumiswami rights. Within two years they purportedly sold the land to the respondent by a deed that the …
Gwalior Sugar Co. Ltd., a private limited company, was granted 215 bighas of land in 1941-42 for setting up a sugar factory, with pattas prohibiting agricultural use. Facing financial difficulties, the company sold about 9 bighas of surplus land, leading to a public interest litigation alleging …
The respondent Jagdish obtained a right of way over the appellants' land under Section 131 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, which the Tahsildar approved. The appellants challenged this by filing a civil suit for a declaration that no easement existed and that the Tahsildar's order was …
The respondents applied to the District Industries Centre for a parcel of Nazul land (Survey No. 462) to set up an industrial unit. The Collector transferred the land to the Industries Centre on 27 July 1991 and later, after the Madhya Pradesh Housing Board objected, ordered a status‑quo restraining …
The Municipal Corporation of Ratlam appealed against a High Court order that it could not levy property tax on a building and superstructure erected by the Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti within a market yard located in the corporation's area. The dispute turned on the proviso to Section 9(3) of the Madhya …
Raj Homes Pvt. Ltd. and another challenged the Madhya Pradesh Government’s Rule 14, which imposes a flat-rate premium on agricultural land diverted to non‑agricultural use, alleging that the rule exceeds the powers granted under sections 59(5) and 258(iii) of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code and …
The plaintiff, Narain Prasad Aggarwal, claimed ownership of a parcel of land that had been auctioned in 1859 and subsequently passed down through his ancestors. The State of Madhya Pradesh asserted that the land was Nazul land held by the government on lease to the plaintiff's predecessor, Putri …
The plaintiffs, Motilal and others, owned land recorded in revenue records but the State of Madhya Pradesh had taken the land under Nigrani (supervision) to recover a loan and handed it to a cultivator, who in turn gave possession to the respondent Niyazuddin. After the loan was repaid, the State …
The appellant, Balkrishan, purchased agricultural land in 1960 that was under attachment and later auctioned to a minor son of Mohan Singh. Rajendra Singh, the minor's predecessor, filed an application under Section 250 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code seeking restoration of possession, and …
The dispute concerned agricultural land in Madhya Pradesh where the original bhumiswami sold the land to the respondent but had earlier granted a one‑year lease to the appellant. The appellant claimed the lease was renewed for a second year, thereby acquiring bhumiswami rights under the Madhya …
The Supreme Court examined a suit filed in 1968 for redemption of a mortgage executed in 1934 over agricultural land in Mandsaur. The Court held that the suit was time‑barred under Section 275 of the Qanoon Ryotwari Gwalior State Act, which provides a three‑year limitation for redemption suits. It …
The Central Government sought land in Madhya Pradesh for the Bhilai Steel Plant and, under the 1925 Rules, agreed to pay the State a one‑time capitalised amount equal to 25 times the assessed land revenue, thereby obtaining exemption from further land revenue. The land was transferred to Hindustan …
The appellants, who were tillers of agricultural land allotted under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954, held the land by a temporary sanad in 1954 that became permanent in 1965. After purchasing the land, the respondent, an absentee landlord, sought possession under …
The Supreme Court examined a dispute over 19 Bighas 8 Biswas of agricultural land originally granted by maufi to a temple in former Gwalior State. After the maufi grant was revoked, the land became Aukaf property and was managed by the temple's Pujari, who was only a manager under a Parwana issued …
The dispute involved 19 bighas of land originally granted to the Pitaliyas family, later partnered with the Jhalanis who obtained a civil decree and auctioned the Pitaliyas share, securing a sale certificate and a mutation order in 1953 based on a written compromise. The Collector, seventeen years …
The appellants sought validation of land transfers under the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Rights Act, 1950, which the Collector approved. The Commissioner, invoking section 50 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959, issued a revision of the Collector’s order, which was affirmed by …
The case concerned a family dispute over a 15.62‑acre inam garden granted in 1837, which had become part of the joint Hindu family estate. After the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 came into force, the inam holder became a bhumiswami under s.158(1)(b), and the question arose whether this …
