This single-judge bench disposed of a writ petition seeking police action against co-owners alleged to be disturbing possession of an undivided plot. The court declined to interfere due to lack of partition details and FIR registration, directing the petitioner to seek other remedies.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 29 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 29357 of 2022 Petitioner :- Smt. Shilpi Rani And Another Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajiv Sisodia,Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
The prayer in this writ petition is to command the fourth respondent (S.H.O. P.S. Chandpur, District Bijnor) to take action against the private respondents 5 and 6 pursuant to the order dated 12.9.2022.
As per allegations in the petition, the respondents 5 and 6 are co-owner to the extent of half share in plot no.43 of which some share has been purchased by the petitioners from other coowner, namely, Mahendra Pal Singh. The petitioner no.1 filed an application before the S.D.M. Chandpur complaining that the respondents 5 and 6 are unauthorisedly disturbing her possession and dismantling the Med . By making such complaint, petitioner no.1 has prayed for police support.
There is no disclosure in the writ petition regarding partition of the plot by metes and bounds. Therefore, once it is admitted that the respondents 5 and 6 are co-sharers to the extent of one half share of the plot, each co-sharer would be treated to be in possession to the extent of his share in the undivided plot. In such circumstances, a direction against one co-sharer in respect of enjoyment of joint property would not be appropriate, particularly, in exercise of writ jurisdiction.
Further, there is no disclosure in the writ petition with regard to registration of any first information report, though it is stated that an application dated 12.9.2022 has been submitted before the Station House Officer to take legal action under the provisions of Indian Penal Code. In case, FIR is not being registered recourse can be had to the provisions of Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
In such circumstances, we decline to entertain the petition by leaving it open to the petitioner to take recourse to other appropriate legal remedy as may be advised.
The writ petition is disposed off .
Order Date :- 2.11.2022/piyush
Digitally signed by PIYUSH KUMAR Date: 2022.11.10 10:33:26 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners are entitled to a writ direction against co-sharers for possessory disturbance in an undivided plot.
Whether the petition disclosing no partition by metes and bounds or registered FIR is maintainable in writ jurisdiction.
Whether the petitioner is left open to pursue other appropriate legal remedies.
Smt. Shilpi Rani
Another
State Of U P
S.H.O. P.S. Chandpur
Private Respondents 5 and 6
Manoj Misra
Vikas Budhwar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
