Dispute is regarding possession of agriculture land

vikram singh (Querist) 24 December 2011 This query is : Resolved
Dear Sir
sir there is agriculture land with a family 81 acres girdawari in the name of grand mother (Tija DEvi) and after death all transfer in the name of three sons (1st BHAL SINGH, 2nd POL SHAB, AND 3rd JAGDISH) except 3 acres (i.e. 21 in the name of Bhal singh, 30 in the name of Pol Shab, 27 In the name of Jagdish and remaining 3 till in the name of grand mother Tija devi.
Now possession on land like this from last 20 years and all naheri girdawari in the name of respective possession (due to family and relative panchayat) 24 acres BHAL SINGH INCLUDING 3 ACRES GIRDAWARI IN THE NAME OF TIJA DEVI, 30 ACRES PHOL SHAB AND 27 ACRES JAGDISH.

NOW DISPUTE START IN 2009

BETWEEN RAMNIWASH SON OF BHAL SING

AND

ATMARAM SON OF POL SHAB

ATMA RAM DESTROY THE CROP OF 6.5 ACRES WHICH POSSESSED BY RAM NIWASH AND A REPORT IS PREPARED BY SHO THAT LAND IS POSSESSED BY MOTHER OF ATMA RAM AND THERE IS DISPUTE ON LAND BY GIVE BRIBES ( A FALSE REPORT) NOW SDM PASSED ORDER UNDER SEC 145/146 CRPC THEN WE MOVE ON HIGH COURT. HIGH COURT PASSED STAYED ORDER IN FIRS HEARING IN RESPECT TO 3.5 ACRES THAT POSSESSION IS GIVEN TO THE PERSON FROM WHOM IT WAS TAKEN. NOW SDM REFUSE TO ACCEPT THE STAYED ORDER THEN WE AGAIN MOVE TO HIGH COURT THEN HIGH COURT PASSED ORDER IN RESPECT OF 6.5 ACRES THAT POSSESSION HANDOVER TO THE PERSON WHOM IT WAS TAKEN. NOW WE APPEAL TO SDM AND SHOW ALL REVENUE RECORDS OF POSSESSION LIKE NAHERI GIRDAWARI , MALL RECEIPT, AND EFFIDAVITE GIVEN BY OUR TENANT. BUT SDM NOT CONSIDER REVENUE RECORD AND PASSED AN ORDER ON THE BASES OF EARLIER REPORT OF SHO FOR 3 ACRES THAT POSSESSION IS GIVEN TO ATMARAM'S MOTHER AND REGARDING 3.5 ACRES NO ORDER PASSED ON STAYED GIVEN BY HIGH COURT IS RECORDED.
NOW WE FILE CONTEMPT TO HIGH COURT AGAINST SDM ( NEXT DATE OF HEARING 18 MARCH) AND REVISION CASE IN SESSION COURT (NEXT DATE OF HEARING IS 20 FEB 2012)

NOW AFTER CONSIDERING THE ABOVE FACT PLEASE CONSULT ME ABOUT THE FOLLOWING AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE ITS URGENT BECAUSE WE LOST 6.5 ACRES OWEN LAND BECAUSE OF CORRUPT PERSONS

1. CAN WE POSSESS 3.5 ACRES FOR WHICH NO ORDER IS PASSED BY SDM ONLY STAYED ORDER IS RECORDED EARLIER PASSED BY HIGH COURT STATED THAT POSSESSION IS GIVEN TO THE PERSON FROM WHOM IT WAS TAKEN

2. CAN DC HAVE THE POWER TO CHANGE THE SDM DECISION IN THE ABOVE SITUATION EVEN FOR 3.5 ACRES OR FOR ALL 6.5 ACRES

ALL PEOPLE AND PATWATI AND NUMBERDAR KNOWS THAT LAND IS OUR BUT ANOTHER PARTY POSSESS FORCEFULLY

PLEASE HELP

IF YOU WANT TO ANY MORE INFORMATION. I WILL PROVIDE.

VIKRAM SINgh 9999916827

Follow Query

Report Abuse