Disposed

Kishanvir Singh v. State of U.P. and 10 Others

Allahabad HC13 Sept 2023WRIC/21000/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought mandamus to hand over disputed land and claim damages for alleged illegal possession. The court found possession intact under a prior temporary injunction and no significant cause of action for damages, leading to disposal of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Present petition disposed of; no specific relief granted as cause of action found insufficient.

Kishanvir Singh Vs State of U.P. and 10 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:177700

¶2

Court No. - 52

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 21000 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Kishanvir Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 10 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Krishna Kant Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Surendra Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent nos.1 to 7.

¶7

The present petition has been filed seeking the following relief:-

¶8

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the state respondents to handover the land-in-question bearing Khata No.025, Khasra No.76, Area-1.0250 Hectare and Khasra No.216, Area-1.6080 situated at Village & Post-Kota, Tehsil & District-Hathras to petitioner and also not interfere in peaceful use, occupation and enjoyment of land-inquestion by petitioner.

¶9

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the state respondents shall insure payment of damages in respect to illegal possession over land-in-dispute in violation of right of petitioner provided Under Article-300A of Constitution of India."

¶10

In pursuance of the earlier order and direction, respondent no.3 is present in person today along with the specific instructions which are taken on record through learned Standing Counsel.

¶11

By bare perusal of the instructions, the factual position which has been described therein, that Original Suit No.372 of 2022 has already been instituted by the petitioner for seeking permanent injunction, wherein temporary injunction has been granted by learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Hathras vide order dated 22.05.2023, but the demarcation has already been carried out before the order dated 22.05.2023 and the possession of respondent no.11 has already been demarcated, sofor as regarding the area 1.6080 hectare pertains to Khata No.025 Khasra No.216 and area 1.0250 hectare pertains to Khasra No.76 related to the petitioner, has never been disturbed and the same is intact with the possession of the petitioner.

¶12

Plot No.216 pertains to the petitioner, has been protected with

¶13

the temporary injunction granted by learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Hathras and as such, the relief sought through the instant petition is basically subject to outcome of the Original Suit No.372 of 2022 (Kishanveer Vs. State of U.P. and others).

¶14

Learned Standing Counsel vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the petition on the basis of instructions and submitted that there is hardly any damages caused due to any action taken up by the State-respondents and as such, there is hardly any case for payment of damages in favour of the petitioner.

¶15

After having the detailed arguments raised by learned Standing Counsel as well as after perusal of the instructions, it is crystal clear that there is hardly any cause of action arises in favour of the petitioner to pursue the instant petition when the entire area pertaining to the plots related to the petitioner is already intact.

¶16

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present petition is hereby disposed of accordingly.

¶17

Personal appearance of the respondent no.3 is dispensed with.

¶18

Order Date :- 13.9.2023 Vivek Kr.

¶19

Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kishanvir Singh v. State of U.P. and 10 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kishanvir Singh v. State of U.P. and 10 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

Jagdish Prasad Pandey Vs Up Zila Adhikari and 15 Others

Dhananjay Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rajendra Prasad Verma Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Subhawati Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dhirendra and Another Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Ram Gopal Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others