RAMESH DAS (DEAD) THR. LRS. vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THRUOGH COLLECTOR — C.A. No. 5041/2009
Case under Section III. Status: DISPOSED.
CNR: SCIN010087452003
Filing Date
22-Apr-2003
Registration No
C.A. No. 5041/2009
Diary Number
8745/2003
Order Date
22-Jul-2019
Document Type
Judgement - of Main Case
Neutral Citation
2019 INSC 785
Disposal Type
Dismissed
Data as of 21-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
RAMESH DAS (DEAD) THR. LRS.
Adv. M. P. SHORAWALA (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [P-1]
Respondent(s)
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THRUOGH COLLECTOR
Adv. RAHUL KAUSHIK (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [R-1] RAHUL KAUSHIK (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [R-2] RAHUL KAUSHIK (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [R-3]
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA
Fixed Date by Court
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 22-Jul-2019 | Fixed Date by Court |
| 16-Jul-2019 | Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week |
| 11-Jul-2019 | Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week |
| 10-Jul-2019 | Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week |
| 01-May-2019 | Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week |
Orders
Case Summary: Ramesh Das v. State of Madhya Pradesh The Supreme Court dismissed Ramesh Das's appeal challenging his ownership claim over Shri Ram Mandir temple land in Madhya Pradesh. Das claimed the temple was private family property built by his ancestors on gifted jagir land, and that he succeeded as the pujari. The trial court decreed in his favor, but the lower appellate court and High Court reversed, finding Das failed to prove the temple was private property. The Supreme Court upheld this reversal, noting Das produced no document of title—only revenue entries showing the temple owned the land with his father listed merely as Manager, not owner. The court held revenue documents do not create title, and Das's own pleading contradicted his claim (stating the temple was built before land was gifted). The appeal was dismissed as lacking merit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts