SEARCH
CONTENTS OF THIS BLOG
-
▼
2011
(94)
-
▼
January
(11)
- ALWAYS THE LAW & RULES PREVAIL AND NOT THE EXECUT...
- If for any reason, the taluk office do not have th...
- PRESUMPTION IN PTCL CASES
- KHARAB LAND AND CONVERSION CLARIFIED BY JUSTICE AN...
- IMPORTANCE OF SOURCE OF TITLE RATHER THAN LONG ENT...
- CRIMINAL PROSECUTION ON GOVERNMENT LAND ENCROACHER...
- CONCEPT OF EQUALITY, JURISDICTION, WRONGS AND MIS...
- CHANGES IN HINDU PERSONAL LAWS
- PROOF OF A DOCUMENT MERE MARKING OF DOCUMENT IS NO...
- NO LITIGANT IS HAVING RIGHT TO WATE COURT TIME
- EVERY COURT HAS TO FOLLOW STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS E...
-
▼
January
(11)
IMPORTANCE OF SOURCE OF TITLE RATHER THAN LONG ENTRY IN REVENUE RECORDS - JUSTICE K RAMANNA
Boramma Vs. Srinivasa and Others 2009 (2) KarLJ 385 Honourable Judges: K. Ramanna, J. Date of Judgement: 09/01/2009, Regular Second Appeal No. 381 of 2002, Of course, the revenue documents disclose that since from 1981-82 the name of plaintiff 2 and plaintiff 1 appear in revenue records as possessor of suit lands. But these revenue records cannot be termed as title deeds to confer on them the right of ownership over suit properties. The plaintiffs have not placed on record any other deed or document to prove the source of title. Further, they have not disclosed any particulars for change of khata in the name of plaintiffs. No iota of evidence is placed on record to show why her name is entered in the revenue records and how she become owner of the suit property and whether there was any consideration passed therein or the same was by way of any family arrangement. Such things has not been pleaded nor proved before Court. Mere entry in the revenue records will not confer any title to the plaintiffs and on the basis of the said entries, the plaintiffs cannot be termed as owners of suit properties. State of Himachal Pradesh v Keshav Ram and Others, AIR 1997 SC 2181: (1996)11 SCC 257: ILR 1998 Kar. 1 (SC), it is held as under: "Entry in a revenue record or papers by no stretch of imagination can form the basis for declaration of title". Further, in case of Smt. Sawami v Smt. Inder Kaur and Others, AIR 1996 SC 2823: (1996)6 SCC 223 wherein it is held thus: "Mutation of name in revenue records, effect, held, does not create or extinguish the title nor has any presumptive value on title, it only entities the person concerned to pay land revenue".
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment