Dismissed

Panna Lal v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC7 Dec 2018WRIC/40291/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking direction to vacate disputed land. The court held the petition was deficient in facts, failed to describe the land, and the dispute was purely private, involving no state action, thus outside writ jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

Cost of Rs.5,000/- imposed on petitioner and order transmitted to District Magistrate for recovery.

Panna Lal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 39 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 40291 of 2018 Petitioner :- Panna Lal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akhilesh Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶2

Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Akhilesh Srivastava, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Hari Ram Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1,2 and 3.

¶4

The petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondent to get the land in dispute vacated from the respondent no.4. Not a single paragraph to the writ petition gives any description of the land, neither the plot number nor where it is situated in the village nor city nothing has been mentioned in the writ petition. In paragraph 3 to the writ petition the petitioner states that he filed a suit for cancellation of agreement and suit was decreed in his favour. Between whom was the agreement executed nothing has been stated. Petitioner has also not disclosed as to how he has come into possession over the land which he is speaking about. It has been stated in paragraph 6 of the writ petition that Nagar Nigam has cancelled the name of the respondent no.4, and mutated the name of the petitioner over the land. This appears to be a dispute between the petitioner and the respondent no.4, and, therefore it is a purely private dispute and no direction can be issued in writ jurisdiction.

¶5

This is a frivolous writ petition deficient on facts and is accordingly dismissed with cost of Rs.5,000/- which shall be deposited by the petitioner with the Registrar General of the Allahabad High Court within one month from today failing which the Registrar General shall intimate the District Magistrate/Collector, Allahabad about the same and thereafter the District Magistrate/Collector, Allahabad shall recover the amount of cost from the petitioner as arrears of land revenue within one month thereafter and shall deposit the same with the Registrar General of the Allahabad High Court. The Registrar General shall then transfer the said amount of Rs.5,000/-to the account of the UP. State Legal Services Authority.

¶6

Let a copy of this order be also placed before the Registrar General, High Court Allahabad.

¶7

Order Date :- 7.12.2018 Rahul.

Panna Lal v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Panna Lal v. State of U.P. and 3 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

Sita Ram Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Others

Ravish Kant Garg Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

M/S Saras and Company Ltd. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sukhvinder Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. and Others

Laddan and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shree Ram Chandra Ji Maharaj/ Thakur Ji Maharaj Mandir and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others