In Brief
This appeal concerns a dispute over land in Uttar Pradesh between two branches of a family. The Revenue Authorities held that Rajbali's entry in Revenue Records was invalid, as he had no legal right to Bechu's share—land that consistently appeared in Bechu's name and devolved to Bechu's legal representatives (the respondents). The appellant, representing Rajbali's branch through a different ancestor (Lalji), challenged this decision through multiple appeals. The Supreme Court upheld the concurrent factual findings of the Revenue Authorities and High Court, dismissing the appeal as the evidence supported that Rajbali had no claim to property recorded in Bechu's name."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.