Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2008 (7) TMI 1091

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t aside the order passed by the single Judge dated November 12, 1998 in Writ Petition No. 457 of 1993. 2. Shortly stated the facts of the case are that one Makhan Singh was a Displaced Person in the year 1947 who settled down in India in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. The Government of Jammu and Kashmir had taken a policy decision in the year 1954 to allot agricultural land with a view to rehabilitate displaced families who were forced to leave the other side of the border (now Pakistan) in 1947 in the wake of partition and who were holding land in that area. 3. The Government, in pursuance of the said policy, passed an order being Government Order No. 254 of 1965 conferring ownership right upon Makhan Singh. The said order reads thu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e left, the family on account of marriage or adoption. 5. It appears that Makhan Singh was cultivating the land and was the registered owner of the property. He was conferred proprietary rights. His name had been entered in the Jamabandi of 1966-67. It was Mutation No. 291 of Village Tariara, Tehsil Kathua. Makhan Singh was shown as the original allottee. 6. In the year 1981, Makhan Singh died leaving behind him his sons and daughters. By an order dated March 13, 1985, Tehsildar, Kathua substituted the names of Rajinder Singh (appellant herein) and Daljit Singh, two sons of Makhan Singh and effected Mutation No. 428 in Revenue Record. 7. Being aggrieved by the said entry in Revenue Record, Kuldip Kaur and Balbir Kaur (daughters of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ued by this Court on December 13, 2002 and interim stay was also granted on the order of the Division Bench of the High Court. Leave was granted on July 25, 2005 and interim relief was ordered to continue. 12. On April 11, 2008, as per order of Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India, the matter was ordered to be placed for final hearing during summer vacation and that is how the matter has been placed before us. 13. The learned Counsel for the appellant contended that the Division Bench of the High Court was wholly wrong in allowing the Letters Patent Appeal and setting aside the orders passed by the Authorities as also by the learned single Judge. It was submitted that the Division Bench of the High Court was wrong in applying the pr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... arties, in our opinion, the High Court was not justified in entering into larger question in view the controversy before the Authorities under the Tenancy Act. From the facts stated above, it is clear that land was allotted to Makhan Singh as a Displaced Person and in Jamabandi 1966-67, his name was entered. Mutation was made in his favour by Entry No. 291 on October 19, 1966. After death of Makhan Singh in 1981, Tehsildar of Kathua entered names of sons of deceased Makhan Singh vide Mutation No. 428. The said action was challenged by respondent No. 2 herein (one of the daughters of Makhan Singh) and her sister Kuldeep Kaur. Their case was that being daughters, they were also entitled to inherit the property. The Authorities, in our opinion .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and questions have been considered with regard to rights of sons and daughters in the property of father under the Hindu Succession Act as also under the Jammu and Kashmir Hindu Succession Act, we clarify that all those observations which were not relevant in view of the limited question before the Revenue Authorities, would have no effect in the proceedings before the Civil Court if such proceedings have been initiated in a competent Court. 20. We, therefore, dispose of this appeal by granting liberty to the parties to take appropriate proceedings in a competent Civil Court by making it clear that the observations made in the orders of Revenue Authorities as also by the High Court will not come in the way of the parties in a suit as an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates