R.18--East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948, S.42 and 44--Natural justice--Jurisdiction of Civil Court--Whenever principles of natural justice are violated, order becomes nullity and civil Court gets jurisdiction even otherwise there is bar to jurisdiction of Civil Court--Plaintiffs nos. 1 to 9 not made party to application filed by defendant under Section 42--No notice of said application or opportunity of hearing was given to plaintiffs 1 to 9--Thus, mandatory provision of provision to Section 42 violated--Therefore, Civil Court has jurisdiction notwithstanding bar of jurisdiction created under Section 44.; Joginder Nath alias Joginder Pal v. Sat Pal & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 742
S.18--East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948, S.42 and 44--Re-opening of partition--Delay of 25 years for filing application under Section 42--On ground that he was posted out of his village since 1953 to 1979--This vague, general and specious ground by defendant no.1 for condonation of delay of 25 years cannot be accepted--In addition plaintiff no.10 and defendant no.2 purchased land from original allottee were bonofide purchaser for consideration--They cannot be made to suffer merely because defendant no.1 opted to move application under Section 42 of Act more than quarter century after repartition scheme had been finalised on 1.11.1953--Order of Director, Consolidation Holding unsustainable. ; Joginder Nath alias Joginder Pal v. Sat Pal & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 742
S.42 and 44--East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation & Prevention of Fragmentation) Rules, 1949, S.18--Re-opening of partition--Delay of 25 years for filing application under Section 42--On ground that he was posted out of his village since 1953 to 1979--This vague, general and specious ground by defendant no.1 for condonation of delay of 25 years cannot be accepted--In addition plaintiff no.10 and defendant no.2 purchased land from original allottee were bonofide purchaser for consideration--They cannot be made to suffer merely because defendant no.1 opted to move application under Section 42 of Act more than quarter century after repartition scheme had been finalised on 1.11.1953--Order of Director, Consolidation Holding unsustainable. ; Joginder Nath alias Joginder Pal v. Sat Pal & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 742
S.42 and 44--East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation & Prevention of Fragmentation) Rules, 1949 Rule 18--Natural justice--Jurisdiction of Civil Court--Whenever principles of natural justice are violated, order becomes nullity and civil Court gets jurisdiction even otherwise there is bar to jurisdiction of Civil Court--Plaintiffs nos. 1 to 9 not made party to application filed by defendant under Section 42--No notice of said application or opportunity of hearing was given to plaintiffs 1 to 9--Thus, mandatory provision of provision to Section 42 violated--Therefore, Civil Court has jurisdiction notwithstanding bar of jurisdiction created under Section 44.; Joginder Nath alias Joginder Pal v. Sat Pal & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 742
S.42 and 44--Plaintiffs claimed to be bonafide purchasers of suit land from original allottees or their vendees--Question of title arose--Director, Consolidation of Holding has no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon said question of title--Order passed by Director, Consolidation holdings is unsustainable.; Joginder Nath alias Joginder Pal v. Sat Pal & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 742
