
The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that restoration proceedings under Section 71A of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act must be initiated within a reasonable time, even though the law sets no time limit.…
The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that restoration proceedings under Section 71A of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act must be initiated within a reasonable time, even though the law sets no time limit. A single judge, Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, also held that once a restoration order becomes final, it cannot be reopened in later proceedings.

The court set aside orders by the Additional Collector and Divisional Commissioner that had reopened a 1988 restoration order concerning 1.32 acres in Ranchi. Amar Kumar Choudhary, the petitioner, had complied with the 1988 order by transferring land. Citing Supreme Court rulings, the court said a delay of around 30 years is the outer reasonable limit and that res judicata applies.
This ruling quietly settles a practical puzzle: what happens when a land law has no time limit for claims? Some may call it a technicality, but the High Court gave a common-sense answer. Old orders cannot be endlessly attacked. For ordinary buyers, this brings certainty after decades. The real test is whether district officials will now stop entertaining such belated pleas. A single case does not change the habit of reopening settled titles. Watch how many similar appeals get dismissed this year.
Source: livelaw.in
This story was synthesised by AI from the source linked above.