Dismissed

Ratan Yadav and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC25 Jul 2018WRIC/24688/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging demolition of construction and interference with peaceful possession over disputed land, the High Court held that the dispute concerning title and identification of land is of purely civil nature and should be decided by civil courts.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; liberty to tenure appropriate remedy before appropriate forum.

Ratan Yadav and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 21

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24688 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Ratan Yadav And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudeep Harkauli,Ramesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arvind Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Govind Mathur,J. Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.

¶5

This petition for writ is preferred with the prayer as follows:

¶6

"(I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents not to demolish the construction of petitioners over the land Khasra No. 641/2 situated at Village-Nasarpur, Pargana-Loni, Tehsil and District-Ghaziabad.

¶7

(II) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents not to interfere in peaceful possession of the petitioners over the land Khasra No. 641/2 situated at Village-Nasarpur, Pargana-Loni, Tehsil and District-Ghaziabad.

¶8

(III) Issue any other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶9

(IV) Award the cost of present writ petition in favour of the Petitioners."

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent-Municipal Corporation, Ghaziabad is interfering in peaceful possession of the petitioners on their own property and also going to demolish the constructions raised thereon.

¶11

On going through the facts stated in the petition of writ and the documents annexed thereto, it appears that the dispute with regard to identification of land and also about the title of land, the dispute sought to be challenged is of purely civil nature and that can very well be agitated before civil court to settle the complicated question of facts, therefore, we are not inclined to interfere with the matter.

¶12

The writ petition is dismissed with liberty to petitioners to avail appropriate remedy before appropriate forum/court for redressal of their grievance.

¶13

Order Date :- 25.7.2018 sweta

¶14

( Chandra Dhari Singh,J. ) ( Govind Mathur,J. )

Ratan Yadav and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ratan Yadav and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Cantonment Board Thru C.E.O. and Another Vs Usha Bunkar and Another

Ved Prakash Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 5 Ors.

Kapil Kumar Dubey Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

M/S Intellicity Business Park Pvt. Ltd. and Another Vs U P Real Estate Regulatory Authority and 3 Others

Ritesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Shahnaz Chaudhary and Another Vs the Registrar, Cooperative Societies U.P. and 15 Others