Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950

42 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

MUSTAQ ALI KHAN (DEAD) BY LRS.versusDEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AND ORS.

1995 INSC 81630 November 1995Disposed off

The appellant, Mustaq Ali Khan (deceased) by his legal representatives, claimed Asami rights over 40.99 acres in Uttar Pradesh after succeeding his disabled son, who had sub‑leased the land to several respondents. The respondents, who had cultivated the land for more than 45 years, asserted Adhivasi status and sought B

U.P. STATE SUGAR CORPORATION AND ANR.versusM/S. MAHALCHAND M. MOTHARI AND ORS.

2004 INSC 62629 October 2004Dismissed

M/s Mahalchand M. Mothari filed two suits in 1982 seeking damages for non‑supply of sugar that it had ordered from the statutory receiver managing Maheshwari Khetan Sugar Mill. The receiver, appointed by the Collector under the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, entered into the contracts in

STATE OF U.P. (NOW UTTARAKHAND)versusRABINDRA SINGH

2009 INSC 62327 April 2009Dismissed

The State of Uttar Pradesh (now Uttarakhand) appealed against a High Court order that had allowed the writ petition of Rabindra Singh, who occupied a 4.10‑bigha plot of agricultural land. The central question was whether land covered by Section 3(14) of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 f

VINOD KUMARversusTHE COMMISSIONER AND ORS.

2004 INSC 31827 April 2004Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether the 23 November 1989 judgment, which granted title and possession of 64 bighas of land to respondents Vinod Kumar and others, constituted a decree that made them tenure‑holders under the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960. The State of U.P. and Meerut Devel

RAM AVTAR AND ORS.versusRAM DHANI AND ORS

1996 INSC 112026 September 1996Dismissed

The widow Smt. Phoola was allotted land in 1932 as part of a family compromise for her maintenance and her name was entered in revenue records. She later sold the land in 1956 to the respondents, but other members of the Hindu Undivided Family challenged the sale, claiming she only held a limited interest under Section

JITENDRA SINGHversusMINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT & ORS.

2019 INSC 128025 November 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Jitendra Singh, a resident of village Saini, challenged the allotment of two village ponds (recorded as ‘pokhar’ in revenue records) to private industrialist Sharp Enterprises by the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (GNIDA). The ponds had been leased to Sharp in 2012, but GNIDA relied on a 2016 Government

RICHPAL SINGH & ANR.versusDESH RAJ SINGH & ORS.

1981 INSC 14925 August 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned agricultural lands in Bulandshahr district where Smt. Ram Kali, a disabled land‑holder, leased the plots to Uttam Singh and Murli Singh in 1945. After her death, her brother Dan Sahai, also a disabled person, succeeded her interest and the lessees continued as year‑to‑year tenants. The question was w

RAM NARAYAN AGARWAL ETC ETC.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & OTHERS

1983 INSC 10123 August 1983Case Partly allowed

The petitioners, who had defaulted on Uttar Pradesh sales tax, were subject to arrest and detention under the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, as a method of recovering arrears treated as land revenue. They challenged the constitutionality of this process, alleging violations of Articles 14

AMAR NATHversusKEWLA DEVI &ANR.

2014 INSC 30422 April 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Amar Nath filed a suit for possession of agricultural land, alleging that the order of the Consolidation Officer dated 14‑02‑1970 was obtained by fraud and that he was entitled to a half‑share as the son of Vaij Nath. The trial court dismissed the suit, holding it barred by the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Lan

RAMGARH FARMS AND INDUSTRIES LTD.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 34021 April 2015Dismissed

Ramgarh Farms and Industries Ltd. held land under a lease dated 25 January 1951, which was later deemed invalid as a tenure holder under the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. The Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 initially declared 5,446 acres surplus in 1962 and

HORILversusKESHAV & ANR.

2012 INSC 4620 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

Horil filed a civil suit in the Munsif Court seeking a declaration that a decree passed by the Assistant Collector, a revenue officer, under the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act was fraudulent because it was based on a forged compromise petition. The respondents contended that the suit was barred by

M/S. GANGESHWAR LTD.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1995 INSC 58219 September 1995Dismissed

Gangeshwar Ltd., a sugar mill in Uttar Pradesh, purchased 31 bighas of agricultural land in 1971 before the amendment to the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960. After the amendment became effective in 1973, the mill sought exemption of the land from ceiling calculations by obtaining a certificate und

MAHESH CHAND (DEAD) THROUGH LR(S)versusBRIJESH KUMAR & ORS.

2025 INSC 100519 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a landlord, sued the tenants for possession and arrears of rent after they defaulted on a tenancy agreement dated 31 July 1970 for a parcel of land used to set up a petrol pump, a non‑agricultural purpose. The trial court dismissed the tenants' jurisdictional challenge and decreed in favour of the appell

BABU NOORUL HASAN KHANversusRAM PRASAD SINGH & ORS.

1979 INSC 21318 October 1979Dismissed

The ex‑Zamindars of a village claimed that lands given on Theka to the respondents in 1948 became their exclusive Sir and Khudkasht and should be recorded as Bhoomidars after the Zamindari vested under the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. The respondents contended that they had become Sirda

NAWAB SYED MURTAZA ALI KHAN (DEAD) BY LRS.versusPRESCRIBED AUTHORITY, RAMPUR AND ORS.

2003 INSC 39718 August 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, the legal heirs of the late Nawab of Rampur, claimed that 1,073 acres of agricultural land listed as his private property in the 1949 Merger Agreement and subsequent letters were exempt from the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act. The State's Prescribed Authority issued a notice tha

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.versusSURESH CHANDRA TEWARI & ORS.

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 70817 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents claimed that a 1967 family settlement had demarcated separate shares of land among family members, so the land could not be treated as the holding of a single tenure‑holder for purposes of the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960. The Prescribed Authority ignored the settlement

SITA RAM (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.versusBHARAT SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS & ORS.

2019 INSC 103617 September 2019Dismissed

The appellants, heirs of the original tenure holders of Plot No. 2902, challenged the validity of a 1973 sale deed that transferred the plot to the respondents and a subsequent 1974 exchange deed that was executed without the permission of the Assistant Collector required under Section 161 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindar

M/S. SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES LIMITEDversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2009 INSC 114917 September 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The Prescribed Authority under the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 issued a notice under Section 9(2) requiring Super Cassettes Industries Ltd to submit details of its land holdings. The company objected, claiming the land was non‑agricultural and the notice was inapplicable; the authorit

POWER MACHINES INDIA LIMITEDversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

2017 INSC 35517 April 2017Dismissed

Power Machines India Ltd obtained an arbitral award under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 directing it to pay a sum to Lakshmi Engineering Industries. The State of Madhya Pradesh, invoking Rule 5 of the Madhya Pradesh MSME Facilitation Council Rules, 2006, sought recovery of the award amou

SH. RAGHUBIR SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 54217 April 1996Dismissed

The third respondent, a tenure‑holder of agricultural land in Uttar Pradesh, transferred 64 bighas each to the appellants in 1974. The prescribed authority declared those transfers void under Section 5(8) of the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960, and ordered the surplus land to be surrendered. The a

MADAN MOHAN MISHRAversusCHANRIKA PANDEY (DEAD) BY LRS.

2009 INSC 20217 February 2009Dismissed

The appellant, Madan Mohan Mishra, filed a suit in 1994 seeking to set aside a deed of gift concerning agricultural lands, alleging the deed was void. Earlier, a suit filed in 1969 concerning the same lands was abated by an order dated 17 July 1973 under the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, and the ap

STATE OF U.P. & ORS.versusM/S. SWADESHI POLYTEX LTD. & ORS.

2008 INSC 73216 May 2008Dismissed

Swadeshi Polytex Ltd., a sick company unable to pay employee wages, was subjected to attachment and auction of its property under the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. The company challenged the sale, arguing that the sale proclamation and auction notice were not served on the actual default

RAGHUNANDAN SINGH & ORS.versusBRIJ MOHAN SINGH & ORS.

1980 INSC 2815 February 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, former zamindars, had granted two Thekas (leases) to the respondents in 1933 and 1943, permitting the lease‑holders to remain in possession, sublet, and collect government revenue. The dispute centered on whether the respondents qualified as hereditary tenants under Section 12 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamin

VIRENDRA NATH THR. P.A. HOLDER R.R. GUPTAversusMOHD. JAMIL AND ORS.

2004 INSC 39614 July 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, the original recorded owners of certain lands in Uttar Pradesh, challenged the recording of Jan Mohammad as Sirdar under section 210 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, on the basis of his alleged adverse possession. The Consolidation Officer had initially recorded him as

KAILASH NATH AGRAWAL AND ORS.versusPRADESHYA INDST. & INV. CORP. OF U.P. AND ANR.

2003 INSC 8714 February 2003Leave Granted & Dismissed

The Pradeshiya Industrial & Investment Corp. of U.P. (PICUP) advanced a loan to Shefali Papers Ltd., secured by mortgage and guarantee bonds executed by Kailash Nath Agrawal and others. After the company was declared sick under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (SICA), PICUP issued demand not

PRAVESH KUMAR SACHDEVAversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2018 INSC 81213 September 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The private respondents, owners of a plot of land attached to satisfy labour court dues, had the land auctioned; Pravesh Kumar Sachdeva was the highest bidder. Under Rule 285‑I of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules, objections to the auction could be filed within thirty days. Only Alok Mitra f

KEDAR NATH DUBEY (D) BY LRS. AND ORS.versusSHEO NARAIN DUBEY (D) BY LRS. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 27812 May 2005Disposed off

The appellant, Kedar Nath Dubey, was the successful bidder at an auction of land under the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, after the respondent, Sheo Narain Dubey, defaulted on a loan. The auction sale was confirmed by the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate (SDM). The respondent challenged the conf

ASMA LATEEF & ANRversusSHABBIR AHMAD & ORS

2024 INSC 3612 January 2024Dismissed

The appellants filed a suit for permanent injunction over a property, alleging an oral gift, while the defendants contested the suit's maintainability under the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. The trial court, ignoring the written statement of one defendant and the pending jurisdictional objecti

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusTHE DISTRICT JUDGE AND ORS.

1996 INSC 118611 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh challenged a decision that excluded lands covered by agreements to sell, but not yet transferred by sale deed, from the holding of a tenure‑holder for purposes of the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960. The tenure‑holder argued that having parted with possession un

MAHARAJA KUMAR SOMENDRA CHAND NANDYversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

1985 INSC 15410 July 1985Dismissed

The appellant, a descendant of Dewan Krishna Kant Nandy, claimed Jagirdari rights over 41 villages granted in 1785 for the purpose of defraying expenses of deity worship, and also held zamindari rights acquired later. When the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 came into force, the State paid

CHANDRIKA PRASADversusPULLO (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.

2000 INSC 20510 April 2000Dismissed

The appellant, Chandrika Prasad, claimed adhivasi rights over two agricultural plots on the basis that his father, Ram Harakh, was a sub‑tenant of a mortgagee and thus entitled to protection under Section 20 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act, 1950. The respondents, who had purchased the lands

NARENDER SINGHversusJAI BHAGWAN AND ORS.

2004 INSC 7059 December 2004Dismissed

The father, a tenure‑holder, executed a sale agreement for agricultural lands that were part of a consolidation proceeding and were recorded solely in his name. The plaintiff sued for specific performance, while the father (deceased) and his sons argued that the father could not sell the entire land because the sons we

RAKESH KUMAR GOEL ETC.versusU.P. STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. & ORS.

2010 INSC 3848 July 2010Dismissed

The appellants Rakesh Kumar Goel and others purchased two government plots in Ghaziabad through an auction purportedly held under the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules, 1952. The High Court set aside the auction on the ground that the appellants failed to deposit the required 25% of the bid immed

RAKESH & ORS.versusBOARD OF REVENUE U.P. & ORS. ETC.

2019 INSC 3368 March 2019Case Partly allowed

Pursottam, a Sirdar, deposited twenty times the land revenue and applied for Bhumidhari rights for three plots, subsequently executing a sale deed. His applications for two plots were rejected and a revision petition was pending when the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms (Amendment) Ordinance, 1977 (la

KARBALAI BEGUMversusMOHD. SAYEED AND ANR.

1980 INSC 1947 October 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Karbalai Begum, a widow, claimed joint possession of two plots of land that she and her late husband's cousins (Mohd. Bashir and Mohd. Rasheed) owned as co‑sharers after the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition Act. She alleged that the defendants, who managed the land while she lived in Lucknow, fraudulently caused her n

SURAJ MAL AND ANOTHERversusRAM SINGH AND OTHERS

1986 INSC 1637 August 1986Dismissed

Suraj Mal and another (appellants) claimed title to a Zamindari parcel sold by Sona Devi, arguing that the sale deed gave them a valid interest. The respondents, Sona Devi's minor sons, sued for declaration that their mother only had a life interest and that the sale was void, seeking possession. The Munsif decreed in

SMT. GULAB DEVIversusTHE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AND ORS.

1996 INSC 12956 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Gulab Devi, succeeded to her father's tenancy under Section 35 of the Uttar Pradesh Tenancy Act, 1939, along with her sister Ram Kumari. After the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 came into force, Ram Kumari died unmarried while Gulab Devi was already married. The Deputy Direc

SMT. VIRAJ KUNWAR AND ORS.versusII ADDL. DISTT. JUDGE AND ORS.

1995 INSC 8385 December 1995Dismissed

The husband, a tenure‑holder under the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, surrendered surplus agricultural land. His wife, who had been judicially separated from him since 1973, claimed that she and their minor children should be treated as a separate holding, allowing her to retain more land. Th

AJAB SINGH & ORS.versusANTRAM AND ORS.

2009 INSC 993 February 2009Dismissed

The case arose from a consolidation proceeding under the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, where orders passed in 1981‑82 were challenged by two respondents who were minors at the time. They filed a revision application in 1993 before the Deputy Director Consolidation, which was allowed, and

MAHANT DOOJ DAS (DEAD) THROUGH LR.versusUDASIN PANCHAYATI BARA AKHARA & ANR.

2008 INSC 5691 May 2008Case Allowed

The plaintiff, Mahant Dooj Das (deceased) through legal representatives, sued to declare title and cancel a sale deed concerning lands he claimed as heir and successor of Mahant Tahal Dass. The defendants argued that the lands were agricultural areas demarcated under the Uttar Pradesh Urban Areas Zamindari Abolition an

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search