Maniram v. Rukmani
Case brief
What is this about?
Writ petition challenging orders directing reversion of land. Court found petitioners failed to establish lawful purchaser status due to unregistered deed and mismatch in possession, dismissing the petition.
What did the court decide?
Petition dismissed; impugned orders of Sub-Divisional Officer, Collector, and Commissioner remain intact.
What the court decided
Page 1 of 5
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Reserved on : 20.07.2021
Order Passed on : 12/08/2021
W.P.(227) No. 253 of 2012
- Maniram, S/o. Lilambar,
- Ramcharan, S/o. Lilambar,
- Kanhai, S/o. Chandan,
- Madhusudan, S/o Nanhu,
- Anant Ram, S/o. Ramsingh,
- Banshi, S/o. Ramsingh,
- Amrit, S/o. Ramsingh,
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned orders directing reversion of land to private respondents should be quashed under Article 227.
Whether the petitioners successfully established they are lawful purchasers in possession of the disputed property.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Maniram (etc.)
- respondent
Rukmani & Anr.
- respondent
Sub Divisional Officer (R) Raigarh
- respondent
Collector, Raigarh
- respondent
Commissioner, Bilaspur
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Chhattisgarh HC
- Decided on
- · August
- Registered
- Case no.
- WP227/253/2012
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court