In Brief
After consolidation proceedings in a Delhi village were completed in 1976, respondents applied 23 years later in 1999 under Section 43A of the East Punjab Holdings Act for allotment of land claiming their father's possession was recorded in the consolidation scheme. The Consolidation Officer allowed the claim, but the appellant challenged the order, asserting he received no proper hearing. The Supreme Court found the final order dated 24.12.2004 lacked proper notice and opportunity to be heard; only the applicant was present, not the appellant or his counsel. The Court remitted the matter to the Consolidation Officer for fresh hearing, directing inquiry into whether the claimed possession was lawful encumbrance or mere trespass, the effect of 23-year delay, and whether Section 43A jurisdiction was properly invoked.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.