Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Revision No. 125 of 1958‑59, decided on 9th September 1959.
, para. 15 Petitioner's name not entered as owner in revenue records maintained under S. 135‑B of Sind Land Revenue Code‑Not an "existing owner"‑Such person cannot be allowed to file Forms LC‑I and LC‑II.
Dharamdas Moolchand for Petitioner.
This is a revision filed against an order, dated the 20th of July 1959, passed by Land Commissioner, Hyderabad, whereby he rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner against an order passed by the Deputy Land Commissioner who had refused to entertain Forms LC‑I and LC‑II put in by the petitioner.
The facts of the case are that the petitioner put in Forms LC‑I and LC‑II under Martial Law Regulation No. 64. Enquiries were made and it was found that the petitioner was not entered as an owner in the revenue records: The request of the petitioner was, therefore, rejected. He went in appeal but his appeal was also dismissed. Hence this revision.
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. He has drawn my attention to sections 135‑C and 135‑D of Sind Land Revenue Code and the Manual of Village Revenue Accounts for Sind. Sections 135‑C and 135‑D simply lay down procedure for the reporting of acquisition of rights and in respect of register of mutations and register of disputed cases. The relevant section is 135‑B of the Surd Land Revenue Code which defines what the record‑of‑right is. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show me the name of the petitioner in the revenue' records maintained under section 135‑B. An existing owner is one whose name is entered as an owner in the revenue records and, since the petitioner has not been entered as such, he cannot be allowed to file Forms LC‑I and LC‑II.
The Manual of Village Revenue Accounts for Sind is only procedural and does not help the petition at all. In these circum stances, no interference is justified. The revision fails and is rejected hereby.
S. Q. Revision rejected.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer