{"id":12094,"date":"2006-01-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-01-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006"},"modified":"2016-02-02T18:06:51","modified_gmt":"2016-02-02T12:36:51","slug":"puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006","title":{"rendered":"Puran & Ors vs Gram Panchayat, Faridabad on 30 January, 2006"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Puran & Ors vs Gram Panchayat, Faridabad on 30 January, 2006<\/div>\n
Author: Raveendran<\/div>\n
Bench: Arijit Pasayat, R. V. Raveendran<\/div>\n
           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  5517 of 2003\n\nPETITIONER:\nPuran & Ors.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nGram Panchayat, Faridabad\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 30\/01\/2006\n\nBENCH:\nArijit Pasayat & R. V. Raveendran\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
J U D G M E N T
\nRAVEENDRAN, J.\n<\/p>\n
\tThis is a plaintiff’s appeal against the judgment dated
\n19.9.2002 of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Regular Second
\nAppeal No.3689 of 2002 confirming the judgment and decree of
\nthe first appellate court dated 6.8.2002 allowing defendant’s
\nappeal and dismissing the plaintiff’s suit. The first appeal was filed
\nby the defendant against the judgment and decree dated
\n16.1.2002 in Civil Suit No. 1083\/1996 on the file of Civil Judge,
\nJunior Division, Palwal decreeing the suit for a declaration that the
\nplaintiffs are the owners in possession of the suit land (agricultural
\nland measuring  70 Kanals and 1 Marla situated within the revenue
\nestate of village Hassapur, Tehsil Palwal, district Faridabad,
\ndescribed in the plaint).\n<\/p>\n
2.\tThe appellants filed the said suit alleging that a century prior
\nto the filing of the suit, the suit land had been entrusted by the
\ndefendant\/owners of the land, to their (Appellants’) forefathers for
\ncultivation on the understanding that they and their successors
\nwould not be evicted therefrom; that as per the local custom, such
\ntenants became full fledged owners by acquiring occupancy rights
\nunder Sections 5 and 8 of the Punjab Tenancy Act, 1887 (for short
\n‘the Tenancy Act’) read with Section 3 of the Punjab Occupancy
\nTenants (Vesting of Proprietary Rights) Act, 1953 (for short ‘the
\nProprietary Rights Act’). The appellants contended that though the
\nname of respondent Gram Panchayat was entered as the owner of
\nthe suit land in the revenue records, the respondent had no right,
\ntitle or interest therein.\n<\/p>\n
3.\tThe suit was contested by the respondent Panchayat.
\nRespondent alleged that the suit land, being part of Shamilat deh,
\nvested in it under section 4(1) of the Punjab Village Common
\nLands (Regulations) Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Common Lands Act’).
\nIt was also pointed out that as the Gram Panchayat itself came into
\nexistence in or about the year 1952, the question of the
\nrespondent Panchayat entering into any agreement with the
\nforefathers of appellants about 100 years prior to the suit, as
\nalleged by the appellants, did not arise. The Gram Panchayat
\ncontended that neither the plaintiffs nor their predecessors had
\ncultivated the suit land at any point of time prior to the Common
\nLands Act came into force, nor secured any occupancy rights at
\nany time under any law or local custom; and that the suit was an
\nattempt to grab a large area of valuable land belonging to the
\nGram Panchayat.\n<\/p>\n
4.\tOn the said pleadings, the parties went to trial, the main and
\nfirst issue being whether the plaintiffs were entitled to a
\ndeclaration that they had become the owners in possession of the
\nsuit land by acquiring occupancy rights thereof. The other issues
\nwere whether the plaintiff had any locus standi to file the suit,
\nwhether the suit was maintainable and whether the court had
\njurisdiction to try the suit.\n<\/p>\n
5.\tThe trial court decreed the suit by judgment dated
\n16.1.2002, on the basis of the oral evidence of the appellants that
\nthey and their predecessors were cultivating the suit land for
\nseveral decades and the revenue documents, namely, Jamabandi
\nfor the years 1966-67, 1971-72, 1976-77, 1986-87, 1991-92 (Ex.
\nP-1 to P-3, P-5 and P-6) and the Khasra Girdawaries (Ex. P-7, P-9,
\nP-11 and P-12) which showed the Gram Panchayat as the owner
\nand Sarjeet (father of appellant Nos.1 to 3) and Jivan Lal (father of
\nappellant Nos.4 and 5) were the Gair Marusian. The trial court held
\nthat the appellants had proved that they were in possession of the
\nsuit land for a period of more than 30 years and had acquired
\noccupancy rights under Section 5 of the Tenancy Act read with
\nSection 3 of the Proprietary Rights Act, and consequently, they
\nwere entitled to the declaration prayed for.\n<\/p>\n
6.\tThe appeal filed by the Gram Panchayat was allowed by the
\nfirst appellate court by judgment and decree dated 6.8.2002. The
\nfirst appellate court held that the suit land which was admittedly
\nShamilat deh of the village and had vested in the Gram Panchayat,
\nunder Section 4(1) of the Common Lands Act; and that the
\nappellants had failed to establish that they had any right title or
\ninterest which was protected under sub-section  (3) of section 4 of
\nthe Act. The first Appellate Court also held that the mere fact that
\nappellants’ predecessors were shown as Gair Marusian for the year
\n1966-67 or subsequent years by paying some nominal rent, will
\nnot given them the status of allottee, lessee or grantee, so to seek
\nany protection under the Common Lands Act or Rules thereunder,
\nunless they are able to establish that they had entered into
\npossession in pursuance of an allotment, lease or grant by the
\nGram Panchayat. Consequently, the first appellate court set aside
\nthe decree of the trial court.\n<\/p>\n
7.\tThe second appeal filed by the appellants was dismissed by
\nthe High Court, affirming the findings recorded by the first
\nappellate court. The said judgment is challenged in this appeal. The
\nfollowing contentions are urged by the Appellants :-\n<\/p>\n
i)\tThe right crystallized in their favour under Section 5 of
\nTenancy Act read with section 3 of Proprietary Rights
\nAct, due to long and uninterrupted possession, could not
\nbe defeated by the Gram Panchayat by invoking section
\n4 of the Common Lands Act.\n<\/p>\n
ii)\tHaving regard to the fact that the names of the father of
\nAppellants 1 to 3 and father of Appellants 4 and 5 were
\nshown in the Jamabhandi for 1966-67 and some
\nsubsequent years as persons cultivating the suit land, it
\nshould be assumed that Appellants and their forefathers
\nwere in possession for a period of more than 12 years
\nimmediately preceding the commencement of the
\nCommon Lands Act, in the absence of positive evidence
\nto the contrary.\n<\/p>\n
8.\tThe Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulations) Act, 1961,
\nenacted by the Punjab Legislature to consolidate and amend the
\nlaw relating Shamilat deh, which  came with operation on
\n4.5.1961, applied to all lands which are Shamilat deh. Section 4 of
\nthe 1961 Act relates to vesting of rights in panchayats and non
\nproprietors. It is extracted below :\n<\/p>\n
“4. Vesting of rights in Panchayats and non-proprietors.
\n(1) Notwithstanding  anything to the contrary contained in
\nany other law for the time being in force or in any
\nagreement, instrument, custom or usage or any decree or
\norder of any Court or other authority, all rights, title and
\ninterests whatever in the land, –\n<\/p>\n
a)\twhich is included in the Shamilat deh of any village
\nand which has not vested in a panchayat under the
\nShamilat law shall, at the commencement of this Act, vest
\nin a panchayat constituted for such village, and, where no
\nsuch panchayat has been constituted for such village, vest
\nin the panchayat on such date as a panchayat having
\njurisdiction over that village is constituted;\n<\/p>\n
b)\twhich is situated within or outside the abadi  deh of a
\nvillage and which is under the house owned by a non-
\nproprietor, shall on the commencement of the Shamilat law,
\nbe deemed to have been vested in such non-proprietor.\n<\/p>\n
(2)\tAny land which is vested in a panchayat under the
\nShamilat law shall be deemed to have been vested in the
\npanchayat under this Act.\n<\/p>\n
(3)\tNothing contained in clause (a) of sub-section (1) and
\nin sub-section (2) shall affect or shall be deemed ever to
\nhave affected the  <\/p>\n
i)\texisting rights, title or interest of persons who
\nthough not entered as occupancy tenants in the
\nrevenue records are accorded a similar status by
\ncustom or otherwise, such as Dholidars, Bhondedars,
\nButimars, Basikhuopahus, Saunjidars, Muqararidars;\n<\/p>\n
ii)\tRights of persons in cultivating possession of
\nShamilat deh for more than twelve years
\n[immediately proceeding the commencement of the
\nAct] without payment of rent or by payment of
\ncharges not exceeding the land revenue and cesses
\npayable thereon;\n<\/p>\n
iii)\tRights of a mortgagee to whom such land is
\nmortgaged with possession before the 26th January,
\n1950.\n<\/p>\n
Sub-section (3) of section 4 makes it clear that neither sub-section
\n(1) (a) nor (2) of section 4 will affect the rights of the three
\ncategories of persons mentioned therein. It is not the case of
\nAppellants that they were accorded a status similar to occupancy
\ntenants by custom or otherwise (though not entered as occupancy
\ntenants in the revenue record), such as Dholidars, Bhondedars,
\nButimars, Basikhuopahus, Saunjidars, and Muqararidars. Nor are
\nappellants mortgagees in favour of whom, the land had been
\nmortgaged with possession prior to 26.1.1950. Therefore, neither
\nclause (i) nor (iii) of sub-section (3) will apply. That leaves only
\nclause (ii) of section 4(3). Clause (ii) of section 4(3) will be
\nattracted only if the following 3 conditions are satisfied : (i) the
\nperson must be cultivating land which is part of the Shamilat deh
\nof a village, (ii) he should be cultivating such land for a period of
\n12 years immediately preceding the commencement of the Act;
\nand (c) he should be cultivating such land without payment of rent
\nor payment of charges in excess of the land Revenue and cess. Let
\nus consider whether appellants fulfilled the said three conditions.\n<\/p>\n
9.\tSection 5 of the Tenancy Act enumerates the tenants who
\nhave the right of occupancy in the land occupied by them. Sub-
\nsections (1) and (2) of section 5 are extracted below:\n<\/p>\n
“5. Tenants having right of occupancy.  (1) A tenant  <\/p>\n
a)\twho at the commencement of this Act has, for more
\nthan two generations in the male line of descent through a
\ngrand-father or grand-uncle and for a period of not less
\nthan twenty years, been occupying land paying no rent
\ntherefor beyond the amount of land revenue thereof and the
\nrates and cesses for the time being chargeable thereon; or <\/p>\n
b)\twho having owned land, and having ceased to be
\nlandowner thereof otherwise than by forfeiture to the
\nGovernment or than by any voluntary act, has, since he
\nceased to be landowner continuously occupied the land; or<\/p>\n
c)\twho, in a village or estate in which he settled along
\nwith, or was settled by, the founder thereof as a cultivator
\ntherein, occupied land on the twenty-first day of October,
\n1868, and has continuously occupied the land since that
\ndate; or<\/p>\n
d)\twho being jagirdar of the estate or any part of the
\nestate in which the land occupied by him is situate, has
\ncontinuously occupied the land for not less than twenty
\nyears, or, having been such jagirdar, occupied the land
\nwhile he was jagirdar and has continuously, occupied it for
\nnot less than twenty years;\n<\/p>\n
has a right of occupancy in the land so occupied unless, in
\nthe case of a tenant belonging to class specified in
\nclause (c), the landlord proves that the tenant was settled
\non land previously cleared and brought under cultivation by,
\nor at the expense of, the founder.\n<\/p>\n
(2)\tIf a tenant prove that he has continuously occupied
\nland for thirty years and paid no rent therefore beyond the
\namount of the land revenue thereof and the rates and
\ncesses for the time being chargeable thereon, it may be
\npresumed that he has fulfilled the conditions of clause (a) of
\nSub-section (1).”\n<\/p>\n
Section 8 of the said Act provides that nothing in Sections 5 to 7
\nshall preclude any person from establishing a right of occupancy on
\nany ground other than the grounds specified in those Sections. The
\nappellants admitted that they were not ‘tenants’ falling under any
\nof the four categories described in sub-section (1) of section 5. Nor
\ncould they establish that they took the suit land from Gram
\nPanchayat in the year 1966 and held the land under the Gram
\nPanchayat as lessee and occupied it continuously for thirty years in
\nthe manner described in sub-section (2) of section 5.\n<\/p>\n
10.\tThe Appellants contend that their right of tenancy is based
\non a ground other than those mentioned in section 5 and is based
\non section 3(a) of the Proprietary Rights Act, which is extracted
\nbelow :\n<\/p>\n
“3. Vesting of proprietary rights in occupancy tenants and
\nextinguishment of corresponding rights of landlords.- No
\nwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any law,
\ncustom or usage for the time being in force, on and from
\nthe appointed day <\/p>\n
a)\tAll rights, title and interest (including the contingent
\ninterest, if any, recognized by any law, custom or usage for
\nthe time being in force  and including the share in the
\nShamilat with respect to the land concerned of the landlord
\nin the land held under him by an occupancy tenant, shall be
\nextinguished, and such rights, title and interest shall be
\ndeemed to vest in the occupancy tenant free from all
\nincumbrances, if any, created by the landlord :\n<\/p>\n
Provided that the occupancy tenant shall have the option
\nnot to acquire the share in the Shamilat by giving a notice
\nin writing to the Collector within six months of the
\npublication of this Act or from the date of his obtaining
\noccupancy rights whichever is later.\n<\/p>\n
Section 3 of the Act relates to vesting of proprietary rights in
\noccupancy tenants and extinguishment of corresponding rights of
\nlandlords. It is evidence therefrom that the right, title and interest
\nshall be deemed to vest only in an ‘occupancy tenant’. Occupancy
\ntenant is defined under section 2(f) as meaning a tenant who,
\nimmediately before the commencement of  the Proprietary Rights
\nAct, is recorded as an occupancy tenant in the revenue records and
\nincludes a tenant who, after such commencement, obtains a right
\nof occupancy in respect of the land held by him whether by
\nagreement with the landlord or through a court of competent
\njurisdiction or otherwise, and includes also the predecessors and
\nsuccessors-in-interest of an occupancy tenant. Admittedly, neither
\nthe appellants nor their predecessors were recorded as occupancy
\ntenants in the revenue records immediately before the
\ncommencement of the Proprietary Rights Act, nor did they obtain a
\nright of occupancy in respect of  the said land either by agreement
\nwith the landlord or through a court of competent jurisdiction or
\notherwise after the commencement of the Act. The appellants,
\ntherefore, do not answer the definition of ‘occupancy tenant’ under
\nthe Proprietary Rights Act. Consequently, they cannot derive any
\nbenefit under Section 3 of the said Act.\n<\/p>\n
11.\tIf section 3 of the Proprietary Rights Act is inapplicable, the
\nquestion that remains for consideration is whether they are entitled
\nto the relief sought merely because the names of Sarjit and Jivan
\nLal (father of appellants 1 to 3 and father of appellants 4 and 5
\nrespectively) were shown as cultivating the lands for some years
\nfrom 1966-67. To get excluded from the vesting under section 4(1)
\nof the Common Lands Act, by relying on section 4(3)(ii), the
\nAppellants should prove that they and their ancestors were
\ncultivating such land for a period of at least 12 years prior to the
\ncommencement of the Common Lands Act. The Appellants have
\nnot produced any document prior to 1966 to show that they were
\nin possession or cultivating the suit land. The oral evidence is also
\nof no assistance. As against the pleading that the land was given to
\nappellants’ forefathers about a century prior to the filing of the
\nsuit, Appellant No. 1 (PW-3) admitted in his evidence that no
\nrecord was available to show that they were so cultivating the land
\nprior to 1966. In his cross-examination, he admitted that neither
\nhis grandfather nor his great grandfather cultivated the suit land.
\nHe stated that he was cultivating the land for about 25 years and
\nearlier his tau (father’s elder brother) was cultivating the land. PW-
\n2 (Aged 35 years) has stated in his evidence (recorded in the year
\n2000) to his knowledge appellants and earlier Sarabjit (father of
\nappellants 1 to 3) was cultivating the land. His knowledge
\nobviously cannot exceed 25 to 30 years. To same effect is the
\nevidence of PW-1 who was aged 40 years when he gave evidence
\nin 2000. There is thus no oral or documentary evidence to show
\npossession or cultivation of suit land by appellants or their
\nparents\/ancestors prior to 1966. The evidence at best shows that
\nfor a few years between 1966-67 and 1986-87 and that too not
\ncontinuously, the appellants (or the father of Appellant 1 to 3 and
\nfather of Appellant 4 & 5) unauthorisedly cultivated some portion
\nof suit land. That does not entitle them to protection under section
\n4(3)(ii) of the Act. Consequently, the vesting under section 4(1) in
\nthe Panchayat cannot be questioned. In view of the above, it is
\nunnecessary to go into the defence evidence that appellants were
\nejected in the year 1976-77 and that thereafter, appellants again
\nillegally cultivated the land for a few years.\n<\/p>\n
12.\tThe suit is based on title. Title is not made out. As a
\nconsequence, the dismissal of the suit by the first appellate court,
\naffirmed by the decision of the High Court in Second Appeal,
\ncannot be said to suffer from any infirmity. The appeal is,
\naccordingly, dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Puran & Ors vs Gram Panchayat, Faridabad on 30 January, 2006 Author: Raveendran Bench: Arijit Pasayat, R. V. Raveendran CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 5517 of 2003 PETITIONER: Puran & Ors. RESPONDENT: Gram Panchayat, Faridabad DATE OF JUDGMENT: 30\/01\/2006 BENCH: Arijit Pasayat & R. V. Raveendran JUDGMENT: J U D G M […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12094","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nPuran & Ors vs Gram Panchayat, Faridabad on 30 January, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\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.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Puran & Ors vs Gram Panchayat, Faridabad on 30 January, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2006-01-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-02-02T12:36:51+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Puran & Ors vs Gram Panchayat, Faridabad on 30 January, 2006\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-01-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-02T12:36:51+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006\"},\"wordCount\":2765,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006\",\"name\":\"Puran & Ors vs Gram Panchayat, Faridabad on 30 January, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2006-01-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-02T12:36:51+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Puran & Ors vs Gram Panchayat, Faridabad on 30 January, 2006\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Puran & Ors vs Gram Panchayat, Faridabad on 30 January, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","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.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Puran & Ors vs Gram Panchayat, Faridabad on 30 January, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2006-01-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-02-02T12:36:51+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Puran & Ors vs Gram Panchayat, Faridabad on 30 January, 2006","datePublished":"2006-01-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-02T12:36:51+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006"},"wordCount":2765,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006","name":"Puran & Ors vs Gram Panchayat, Faridabad on 30 January, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2006-01-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-02T12:36:51+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-ors-vs-gram-panchayat-faridabad-on-30-january-2006#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Puran & Ors vs Gram Panchayat, Faridabad on 30 January, 2006"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12094","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12094"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12094\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12094"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12094"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12094"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}