MAKHAN LAL BHAT v. STATE TH.REVENUE DEPTT.AND ORS.
Court: High Court of Jammu and Kashmir
Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TASHI RABSTAN
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Jammu and Kashmir judgment dated 2020-12-11. MAKHAN LAL BHAT v. STATE TH.REVENUE DEPTT.AND ORS. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR Sr. No. 235 AT JAMMU OWP No. 2476/2018 IA No. 1/2018 (Through Video Conferencing) Makhan Lal Bhat ... Petitioner(s) Through:- None. V/s State and others …Respondent(s) Through:- Mr. S. S Nanda, Sr. AAG. Coram:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE TASHI RABSTAN, JUDGE ORDER 11. 12. 2020 1. In terms of order dated 01. 12. 2018, the Deputy Commissioner, Kupwara was directed to file compliance report. 2. The Deputy Commissioner Kupwara has filed the compliance report contending therein that complying with the direction issued by this Court, a report was sought from the Tehsildar Sogam, who vide communication No. TSL/OQ/19/447 dated 02. 02. 2019 intimated that the land under Survey No. 2492 measuring 13 Marlas is recorded in the name of Saroop Nath and others sons of Mahadev and Satish Kumar son and Danovoti wife of Omkar Nath Pandith is vacant on spot, whereas land falling under Survey No.
2491 measuring 16 Marlas is recorded in the name of Makhan Lal son of Tara Chand half and Shamboo Nath son of Narayin Pandith half, thus as per the revenue record, the land measuring 08 Marlas falls within the share of the petitioner, which is also vacant on spot. The report of Tehsildar, Sogam along with extract of Girdawari, Jamabandi and 2 OWP No. 2476/2018, CM No. 1/2018 Sketch Map are attached as Annexure-A1 with the compliance report filed by the District Magistrate, Kupwara. 3. In view of the compliance report, nothing remains in the present petition to adjudicate. Therefore, instead of keeping the petition as pending consideration, it would be appropriate to dispose of the same. Accordingly, the same is disposed of in light of averments made in the compliance report dated 10. 05. 2019. However, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the appropriate authority to avail remedy if any, available to him, in terms of the rules admissible to the field. 4.
Disposed of as above along with connected application. (Tashi Rabstan) Judge Jammu 11. 12. 2020 Surinder Whether the order is speaking? Yes/No Whether the order is reportable? Yes/No SURINDER KUMAR 2020. 12. 16 10:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Source: High Court of Jammu and Kashmir. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.