{"id":315292,"date":"2024-02-25T11:00:07","date_gmt":"2024-02-25T05:30:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=315292"},"modified":"2024-02-25T19:06:33","modified_gmt":"2024-02-25T13:36:33","slug":"sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/","title":{"rendered":"Never Reported Judgment| Presumption of correctness on revenue records attaches to both earlier and later entries, unless earlier entries expressly declared incorrect [(1952) 2 SCC 574]"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Supreme Court:<\/span> The present case was an appeal filed by the appellant challenging the judgment passed by the High Court of Pepsu<\/span> (‘the High Court’), the three-judges bench of M.C. Mahajan<\/span>*, Chandrasekhara Aiyar and N.H. Bhagwati, JJ., opined that the entries made in the pedigree table prepared at the settlement of 1904 were a weighty piece of evidence, and the High Court was justified in placing reliance on them to prove the respondents’ relationship with Daya Singh. Further, family members on whose information the settlement officer prepared the pedigree in 1904 must be presumed to have given a correct pedigree to him and would have better knowledge in the matter than those on whose information the pedigree was prepared in the 1928, i.e. twenty-four years afterwards.<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court opined that in law, presumption of correctness attaches to the records prepared in accordance with the provisions of the Land Revenue Act at whatever period they might have been prepared unless the later record in express terms declared that the earlier entries were incorrect. Thus, the Supreme Court opined that the High Court was right in holding that the respondents were collaterals of Daya Singh in the seventh degree and dismissed the present appeal.<\/p>\n

Background<\/p>\n

In the present case, the disputed land belonged to Daya Singh, who died childless about thirty-five years ago, leaving him surviving a widow. Thereafter, by a deed executed and registered on 23-12-1944, the widow adopted the appellant. Further, on 15-03-1947, the respondent claiming to be the collaterals of Daya Singh, instituted the suit for a declaration that the adoption was null and void as against their reversionary rights. The Trial Court dismissed the suit on the ground that the respondents had failed to prove their collateral relationship with Daya Singh, and on an appeal to the District Judge, this decision was affirmed. Subsequently, the second appeal was preferred to the High Court, wherein the High Court held that the respondents had established their relationship with Daya Singh.<\/p>\n

Thus, the appellant preferred the present appeal. The appellant relied on Section 100<\/a> of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908<\/a> (‘CPC’) and stated that the High Court had acted more than its jurisdiction in reversing in second appeal on a pure question of fact that the respondents were not the collaterals of Daya Singh. Further, the appellant contended that the pedigree table prepared at the settlement of 1904 was not correct, and a new pedigree table was prepared in 1928 to which the presumption of correctness attaches. The defendant stated that the pedigree table of 1928 showed that Soora and Karmu were heads of two different families, and while Soora’s father’s name was mentioned, Karmu’s father was not mentioned, and this omission negatives the respondent’s case that Soora and Karmu were real brothers.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law, and Decision<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court opined that the provisions of Section 100<\/a> of CPC<\/a>, had no application to an appeal preferred to the High Court and it had jurisdiction in a second appeal to correct errors of fact and law of the subordinate courts. Therefore, the Supreme Court abandoned the contention that the High Court had acted more than its jurisdiction in disturbing the finding of the District Judge.<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court opined that the entries made in the pedigree table prepared at the settlement of 1904 were a weighty piece of evidence, and the High Court was justified in placing reliance on them to prove the respondents’ relationship with Daya Singh. Further, family members on whose information the settlement officer prepared the pedigree in 1904 must be presumed to have given a correct pedigree to him and would have better knowledge in the matter than those on whose information the pedigree was prepared in the 1928, i.e. twenty-four years afterwards. The Supreme Court took note of the District Judge opinion that a presumption of correctness attaches to the entries made in the revenue papers prepared at a later date, as the later entries were supposed to had corrected errors and opined that this proposition did not seem to be sound. The Supreme Court opined that in law, presumption of correctness attaches to the records prepared in accordance with the provisions of the Land Revenue Act at whatever period they might have been prepared unless the later record in express terms declared that the earlier entries were incorrect.<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court opined that pedigree prepared at the settlement of 1904 was certainly presumptive evidence to prove the respondents’ relationship with Daya Singh, and similar presumption attached to the pedigree table prepared in 1928 and the entries made in 1928 had to be presumed to be correct to the extent they went, and no one disputes their correctness. The Supreme Court opined that the omission of Karmu’s father’s name in 1928 pedigree might have been due to the circumstance that the descendants of Karmu were not able to inform the revenue officer the name of Karmu’s father, while the descendants of Soora were able to mention the name of Soora’s father and they were not able to say whether Soora and Karmu were brothers. The Supreme Court opined that the inference could not be drawn that those who stated in 1904 that Karmu and Soora were brothers, had mentioned this fact falsely.<\/p>\n

Further, regarding the contention that in 1904 pedigree table Dhandu was entered as the common ancestor of the parties, but in 1928 pedigree table, Nandu was shown as the father of Soora and that he must be a different person. The Supreme Court opined that the High Court was right in the view that Nandu and Dhandu were the names of the same individual, and it seemed that this confusion of names between Dhandu and Nandu was due to some error in recording the names. The Supreme Court opined the view taken by the High Court was also supported by the entries in the jamabandi, wherein it was shown that both these branches have a one-seventh share in a joint patti.<\/p>\n

Thus, the Supreme Court opined that the High Court was right in holding that the respondents were collaterals of Daya Singh in the seventh degree and dismissed the present appeal.<\/p>\n

[Inder Singh v. Dhanna Singh, (1952) 2 SCC 574<\/a>, decided on 04-12-1952<\/span>]<\/p>\n

*Note: Presumption of correctness in revenue records<\/p>\n

In Partap Singh v. Shiv Ram<\/span>, (2020) 11 SCC 242<\/a> it had been held that presumption of truth attached to the revenue record can be rebutted only based on evidence of impeccable integrity and reliability. The oral evidence can always be adduced contrary to the revenue record, but such oral testimony will not be sufficient to hold that the statutory presumption stands rebutted. The Supreme Court held that the revenue record can be rebutted if such entry was made fraudulently or surreptitiously, or where such entry has not been made by following the prescribed procedure.<\/p>\n

*Judgment by- Justice M.C. Mahajan<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

For the Appellant:<\/span> Bakshi Tek Chand, Senior Advocate (A.N. Chona, Advocate, with him);<\/p>\n

For the Respondents:<\/span> Ratan Lal Chawla, Senior Advocate (K.N. Aggarwala, Advocate, with him)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1952 on presumption of correctness in revenue records.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67520,"featured_media":315329,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,58675],"tags":[65720,65722,65723,65721,58925,65719,32852,5363],"class_list":["post-315292","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casesreported","category-scc-never-reported-judgments-supreme-court","tag-earlier-entries","tag-expressly","tag-incorrect","tag-later-entries","tag-never-reported-judgment","tag-presumption-of-correctness","tag-revenue-records","tag-supreme-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSupreme Court's Never Reported Judgment on presumption of correctness in revenue records | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Supreme Court opined that the respondent was bound by law to execute a conveyance as per the agreement, and his right, title or interest would pass under the same.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Never Reported Judgment| Presumption of correctness on revenue records attaches to both earlier and later entries, unless earlier entries expressly declared incorrect [(1952) 2 SCC 574]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court opined that the respondent was bound by law to execute a conveyance as per the agreement, and his right, title or interest would pass under the same.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-02-25T05:30:07+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-02-25T13:36:33+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/tmp_bf42a84a-5971-49bc-95bf-85622be54950.jpeg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Arushi\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Never Reported Judgment| Presumption of correctness on revenue records attaches to both earlier and later entries, unless earlier entries expressly declared incorrect [(1952) 2 SCC 574]\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Arushi\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/\",\"name\":\"Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment on presumption of correctness in revenue records | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/nrj_12.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-02-25T05:30:07+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-02-25T13:36:33+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ded7dcfe9a971ee0916ce27ee7c09c76\"},\"description\":\"Supreme Court opined that the respondent was bound by law to execute a conveyance as per the agreement, and his right, title or interest would pass under the same.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/nrj_12.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/nrj_12.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"presumption of correctness revenue records\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Never Reported Judgment| Presumption of correctness on revenue records attaches to both earlier and later entries, unless earlier entries expressly declared incorrect [(1952) 2 SCC 574]\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ded7dcfe9a971ee0916ce27ee7c09c76\",\"name\":\"Arushi\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/6b48b1199732c282ba60ff0b2a7076c33917ee6bd9aca6c333a92ceb8fcb6a3d?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/6b48b1199732c282ba60ff0b2a7076c33917ee6bd9aca6c333a92ceb8fcb6a3d?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Arushi\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/arushi\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment on presumption of correctness in revenue records | SCC Times","description":"Supreme Court opined that the respondent was bound by law to execute a conveyance as per the agreement, and his right, title or interest would pass under the same.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Never Reported Judgment| Presumption of correctness on revenue records attaches to both earlier and later entries, unless earlier entries expressly declared incorrect [(1952) 2 SCC 574]","og_description":"Supreme Court opined that the respondent was bound by law to execute a conveyance as per the agreement, and his right, title or interest would pass under the same.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-02-25T05:30:07+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-02-25T13:36:33+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/tmp_bf42a84a-5971-49bc-95bf-85622be54950.jpeg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Arushi","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Never Reported Judgment| Presumption of correctness on revenue records attaches to both earlier and later entries, unless earlier entries expressly declared incorrect [(1952) 2 SCC 574]","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Arushi","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/","name":"Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment on presumption of correctness in revenue records | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/nrj_12.webp","datePublished":"2024-02-25T05:30:07+00:00","dateModified":"2024-02-25T13:36:33+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ded7dcfe9a971ee0916ce27ee7c09c76"},"description":"Supreme Court opined that the respondent was bound by law to execute a conveyance as per the agreement, and his right, title or interest would pass under the same.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/nrj_12.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/nrj_12.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"presumption of correctness revenue records"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Never Reported Judgment| Presumption of correctness on revenue records attaches to both earlier and later entries, unless earlier entries expressly declared incorrect [(1952) 2 SCC 574]"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ded7dcfe9a971ee0916ce27ee7c09c76","name":"Arushi","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/6b48b1199732c282ba60ff0b2a7076c33917ee6bd9aca6c333a92ceb8fcb6a3d?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/6b48b1199732c282ba60ff0b2a7076c33917ee6bd9aca6c333a92ceb8fcb6a3d?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Arushi"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/arushi\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/nrj_12.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":322934,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/05\/26\/entries-in-revenue-records-are-not-by-themselves-sufficient-to-rebut-the-presumption-of-jointness-of-family-sc-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":315292,"position":0},"title":"Never Reported Judgment| Entries in revenue records have considerable value but not by themselves sufficient to rebut the presumption of jointness of the family [(1953) 1 SCC 483]","author":"Simranjeet","date":"May 26, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"This report covers the Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1953 on relevance of entries in revenue records.","rel":"","context":"In "Cases Reported"","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"entries in revenue records","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/entries-in-revenue-records.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/entries-in-revenue-records.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/entries-in-revenue-records.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/entries-in-revenue-records.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":341578,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/16\/when-sc-determined-ownership-of-trees-with-spontaneous-growth-on-land-owned-by-government\/","url_meta":{"origin":315292,"position":1},"title":"NRJ Series | When SC determined the ownership of trees with spontaneous growth on the land owned by Government [(1954) 2 SCC 779]","author":"Simranjeet","date":"February 16, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"This report covers the Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment on ownership, dating back to the year 1954.","rel":"","context":"In "Cases Reported"","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"ownership","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/ownership.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/ownership.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/ownership.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/ownership.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":293608,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/01\/land-dispute-with-state-supreme-court-remands-back-matter-to-high-court-for-entirety-of-documents-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":315292,"position":2},"title":"Confusing facts; unanswered issues: SC asks Allahabad HC to decide long drawn land dispute between State and Private parties within a year","author":"Ridhi","date":"June 1, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The saga of twists and turns in facts of the matter starting with a lease deed, revenue entries, compensation, expunction orders, and what not? The series of developments over the past 100 years of suit land even cautioned the Supreme Court from deciding the matter casually.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"land dispute","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/land-dispute.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/land-dispute.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/land-dispute.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/land-dispute.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":291847,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/11\/delhi-government-has-administrative-control-over-transfers-and-postings-of-civil-servants-in-nctd-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":315292,"position":3},"title":"[Delhi Govt. vs LG] Delhi Government has administrative control over transfers and postings of civil servants in NCTD: Supreme Court\u00a0","author":"Apoorva","date":"May 11, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court said that NCTD like other states also represents the representative form of government, the involvement of Union of India in the administration of NCTD is limited by Constitution provisions and any further expansion will be contrary to the constitutional scheme of governance.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi govt vs lg supreme court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-govt-vs-lg-supreme-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-govt-vs-lg-supreme-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-govt-vs-lg-supreme-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-govt-vs-lg-supreme-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":298714,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/06\/co-sharer-disposes-joint-property-and-appropriates-sale-proceeds-will-be-accountable-for-money-to-other-co-sharers-sc\/","url_meta":{"origin":315292,"position":4},"title":"Never Reported Judgment | When a co-sharer in possession of a joint estate disposes of entire property and appropriates sale proceeds, he will be accountable for money to other co-sharers [1951 SCC 122]","author":"Simranjeet","date":"August 6, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThis report covers the Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1951 on Transfer of Property Act, 1882.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Cases Reported"","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"joint estate co-sharer immovable property","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/joint-estate-co-sharer-immovable-property.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/joint-estate-co-sharer-immovable-property.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/joint-estate-co-sharer-immovable-property.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/joint-estate-co-sharer-immovable-property.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":247375,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/04\/19\/balance-sheet-entries-can-amount-to-an-acknowledgement-of-liability-under-section-18-of-the-limitation-act-1963-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":315292,"position":5},"title":"Balance sheet entries can amount to an acknowledgement of liability under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963: Supreme Court","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"April 19, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of RF Nariman, BR Gavai and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ has held that an entry made in the books of accounts, including the balance sheet, can amount to an acknowledgement of liability within the meaning of Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The Court referred\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/315292","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67520"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=315292"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/315292\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/315329"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=315292"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=315292"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=315292"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}