Mere Allegations of Harassment Do Not Constitute Abetment of Suicide: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail to Wife in Matrimonial Suicide Case 'Convenience Of Wife Not A Thumb Rule, But Custody Of Minor Child Is A Weighing Aspect': Punjab & Haryana HC Transfers Divorce Case To Rohtak MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Cooperative Society Is A “Veritable Party” To Arbitration Clause In Flat Agreements, Temple Trust Entitled To Arbitrate As Non-Signatory: Bombay High Court State Government Cannot Review Its Own Revisional Orders Under Section 41(3): Allahabad High Court Affirms Legal Bar on Successive Reviews When Several Issues Arise, Courts Must Answer Each With Reasons: Supreme Court Automatic Retention Trumps Lessee Tag: Calcutta High Court Declares Saregama India ‘Raiyat’, Directs Reconsideration of Land Conversion Application Recovery of Valid Ticket Raises Presumption of Bona Fide Travel – Burden Shifts to Railways: Delhi High Court Restores Railway Accident Claim Failure to Frame Issue on Limitation Vitiates Award of Compensation Under Telegraph Act: Gauhati High Court Sets Aside Order, Remands Matter Compassionate Appointment Is Not a Heritable Right: Gujarat High Court Rejects 9-Year Delayed Claim, Orders Re-Issuance of ₹4 Lakh Compensation Court Cannot Rewrite Contracts to Suit Contractor’s Convenience: Kerala High Court Upholds Termination of Road Work Under Risk and Cost Clause Post-Bail Conduct Is Irrelevant in Appeal Against Grant of Bail: Supreme Court Clarifies Crucial Distinction Between Appeal and Cancellation Granting Anticipatory Bail to a Long-Absconding Accused Makes a Mockery of the Judicial Process: Supreme Court Cracks Down on Pre-Arrest Bail in Murder Case Recognition as an Intangible Asset Does Not Confer Ownership: Supreme Court Draws a Sharp Line Between Accounting Entries and Property Rights IBC Cannot Be the Guiding Principle for Restructuring the Ownership and Control of Spectrum: Supreme Court Reasserts Public Trust Over Natural Resources Courts Cannot Convict First and Search for Law Later: Supreme Court Faults Prosecution for Ignoring Statutory Foundation in Cement Case When the Law Itself Stood Withdrawn, How Could Its Violation Survive?: Supreme Court Quashes 1994 Cement Conviction Under E.C. Act Ten Years Means Ten Years – Not a Day Less: Supreme Court Refuses to Dilute Statutory Experience Requirement for SET Exemption SET in Malayalam Cannot Qualify You to Teach Economics: Supreme Court Upholds Subject-Specific Eligibility for HSST Appointments Outsourcing Cannot Become A Tool To Defeat Regularization: Supreme Court On Perennial Nature Of Government Work Once Similarly Placed Workers Were Regularized, Denial to Others Is Discrimination: Supreme Court Directs Regularization of Income Tax Daily-Wage Workers Right To Form Association Is Protected — But Not A Right To Run It Free From Regulation: Supreme Court Recalibrates Article 19 In Sports Governance S. Nithya Cannot Be Transplanted Into Cricket: Supreme Court Shields District Cricket Bodies From Judicially Imposed Structural Overhaul Will | Propounder Must Dispel Every Suspicious Circumstance — Failure Is Fatal: : Punjab & Haryana High Court Electronic Evidence Authenticity Jeopardized by Unexplained Delay and Procedural Omissions: MP High Court Rejects Belated 65B Application Not Answering to the Questions of the IO Would Not Ipso Facto Mean There Is Non-Cooperation: Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail Undertaking to Satisfy Award Is Not Waiver of Appeal: Supreme Court Restores Insurer’s Statutory Right

Orders Post-1999 Urban Ceiling Repeal Rendered Ex-Facie Illegal; Respondents’ Rights Over Land Upheld:  High Court Dismisses State’s Appeal

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur, led by Hon'ble Shri Justice Amar Nath (Kesharwani), dismissed the appeal filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh in a significant land ownership case in Bhopal. The Court upheld the trial court’s decision favoring the respondents, asserting their ownership and possession rights over the land, which was previously declared surplus under the Urban Land Ceiling Act, 1976.

The judgment primarily addressed the legitimacy of the state’s actions regarding the land following the repeal of the Urban Land Ceiling Act, 1976, and established the rights of the respondents over the disputed land.

The dispute emerged after the state challenged the trial court's judgment, which favored the respondents, Chetan Godani and another, claiming their ownership and possession of the land initially marked as surplus. The respondents maintained their continuous possession and ownership, contesting the state's claims following the 1999 repeal of the Act.

Invalidity of State Actions Post-Repeal: The Court determined that the state’s actions to claim the land after the repeal of the Urban Land Ceiling Act were legally baseless, confirming the trial court’s decision on the respondents' ownership and possession.

Revocation of Government Orders: The Court declared the state's post-repeal orders concerning the land as null and void, reiterating the respondents' rightful claim over the disputed property.

Examination of Ownership and Possession: In its detailed assessment, the Court scrutinized the chain of ownership, mutation records, and the legitimacy of state actions, concluding that the state never formally acquired possession, and the respondents had legal titles following the 1999 repeal.

References to Apex Court Judgments: The High Court cited several Supreme Court cases, such as 'State of U.P. Vs. Hari Ram (2013) 4 SCC 280' and 'State of U.P. and Another Vs. Ehsan and Another, 2023 SCC Online 1331', which played a crucial role in its deliberation over the respondents' legal standing and the inapplicability of the repealed Act.

Decision: The appeal by the State of Madhya Pradesh was dismissed by the High Court, reaffirming the trial court’s decree in favor of the respondents. The judgment established that the respondents rightfully own and possess the disputed land, and the state’s actions post the 1999 repeal were deemed ineffective.

Date of Decision: 01/04/2024.

State of Madhya Pradesh and Others Vs. Chetan Godani

 

Latest Legal News