Petitioner sought writ to restrain authorities from interfering in construction on land allegedly purchased by his wife. Court held non-interference was appropriate as the dispute is primarily civil and the actual owner did not file the petition.
none, writ petition disposed without interference
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.
fNeutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:130217-DB
Court No. - 21
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2615 of 2021 Petitioner :- Krishn Bahadur Srivastav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dinesh Prasad Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J.
is between the petitioner and the private respondent, who is allegedly interfering in the possession of the petitioner. Moreover, the writ petition has not been filed by the wife of the petitioner, who is stated to be owner of the subject land.
Order Date :- 3.7.2023 Rishabh
[Manish Kumar NIgam, J.] [Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.]
Digitally signed by :- RISHABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the court should interfere in a dispute regarding construction on private land where the actual owner has not filed the petition.
Krishn Bahadur Srivastav
State Of U.P.
Manoj Kumar Gupta
Manish Kumar Nigam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
