Dismissed

Surendra Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Allahabad HC26 Oct 2023WRIC/24503/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking mandamus for demarcation of land plots and implementation of a partition decree. The Court held that the exclusive remedy lies under the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 for demarcation, and execution proceedings under the Civil Procedure Code regarding partition decrees should be pursued in the appropriate Civil Court, rather than through writ jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to initiate proper proceedings under the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 for demarcation and appropriate proceedings under CPC for decree implementa

Surendra Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others — Partition | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:203870

¶2

Court No. - 51

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24503 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Surendra Kumar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Yadav,Shweta Singh Attre Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sudhir Bharti

¶5

Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J.

¶6

1.Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Mridul Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Mr. Sudhir Bharti, learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha.

¶7

The instant writ petition has been filed for mandamus directing the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Salemnpur, Deoria to make demarcation of Gata No.713, 856, 811 and 718 situated at VillageBardeeha Dalpat,Tappa-Dod, Tehsil-Salempur,District-Deoria in pursuance of the order dated 25.05.1998 and decree dated 15.11.2003 passed by respondent No.2 as well as directing respondent No.2 to pass appropriate order on the application of the petitioner dated 13.04.2023.

¶8

3.This Court has directed the learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents to obtain instruction in the matter, but instruction has not been received.

¶9

Mr. Mridul Kumar, learned Standing Counsel and Mr. Sudhir Bharti, learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha submitted that petitioner has prayed for implementation of judgment and decree passed in the partition suit. They further submitted that petitioner should avail proper remedy before the Court who passed the decree for partition of the holdings. They next submitted that application dated 13.04.2023 filed by the petitioner demonstrate

¶10

that petitioner wants demarcation of certain plots for which the remedy has been provided under the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 as such no interference is required in the matter in respect to relief claimed in the petition.

¶11

I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶12

The perusal of averments made in the writ petition as well as application dated 13.04.2023 filed by the petitioner demonstrate that in respect to the partition of the holding, judgment/ decree has been passed by the Court concern under U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, as such for the implementation of the judgment and decree passed in partition suit remedy under Article 226 of Constitution of India cannot be exercised.

¶13

So far as demarcation of the plot is concern, petitioner should avail proper remedy before the appropriate Court under U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 rather writ petition before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶14

8. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with liberty to petitioner to initiate proper proceedings in accordance with law.

¶15

Order Date :- 26.10.2023 PS*

¶16

Digitally signed by :- PRITI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Surendra Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendra Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Asraf and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Smt. Sunita Devi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Subodh Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Pramod Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sunil Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Devendra Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others