https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292893 Revenue mutations based on the Farman-i-Shahi were invalid because the authorities did not first verify that the lands pertained to or were attached to the deras. The existing revenue records showed the petitioners as owners, and Section 37 of the Land Revenue Act required proof, admission, agreement of interested parties, or a binding order before entries in records of rights could be varied; none existed, so the mutation orders were illegal and liable to be quashed against the revenue authority. The High Court also held that an alternative civil suit was not an adequate and efficacious remedy in the circumstances, so the Article 226 petitions were maintainable. en-us Fri, 05 Dec 1952 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Apr 2022 14:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292893 Revenue mutations based on the Farman-i-Shahi were invalid because the authorities did not first verify that the lands pertained to or were attached to the deras. The existing revenue records showed the petitioners as owners, and Section 37 of the Land Revenue Act required proof, admission, agreement of interested parties, or a binding order before entries in records of rights could be varied; none existed, so the mutation orders were illegal and liable to be quashed against the revenue authority. The High Court also held that an alternative civil suit was not an adequate and efficacious remedy in the circumstances, so the Article 226 petitions were maintainable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 05 Dec 1952 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292893