Dismissed

Thakurdin and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC21 Feb 2023WRIC/5903/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioners approached the Court for a temporary injunction to restrain respondents from raising constructions over landed property, alleging a violation of a prior decree. The Court held that since the petitioners have an alternative remedy in a pending civil suit and the Sub-Divisional Officer, no injunction could be granted in the writ jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

Temporary injunction refused; writ petition dismissed on ground of alternative remedies.

Thakurdin and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 43 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5903 of 2023 Petitioner :- Thakurdin And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rameshwar Prasad Shukla

¶2

Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Priyavrat, holding brief of Sri Vinod Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents 1, 2 and 3 and Sri Rameshwar Prasad Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent no.4 (Gaon Sabha).

¶4

The grievance of the petitioners is that although the suit filed by their predecessor under Section 229-B of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950 was decreed, the respondents are trying to raise constructions of water tank over their property. Prayer has been made to restrain the respondent from raising constructions over the land allegedly belonging to the petitioners.

¶5

Learned Standing Counsel points out that for permanent prohibitory injunction, the petitioners have already filed civil suit being Original Suit No.202 of 1999, plaint whereof has been annexed as Anneuxre No.3 to the petition. Learned Standing Counsel therefore submits that it is open for the petitioners to seek for temporary injunction in the said suit or even a direction for disposal of said suit in accordance with law and no injunction can be granted in writ jurisdiction.

¶6

Having considered the submissions made and in view of multiple remedies available to the petitioners either for alleging violation of the decree passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer under Section 229-B or even for temporary injunction in the pending civil suit, prayer made in the present petition cannot be granted.

¶7

This petition is dismissed on ground of alternative remedies before civil/revenue court which may be availed by the petitioners for obtaining relief or injunction from the appropriate court.

¶8

Dismissal of this petition will not come in the way of the petitioners claiming for appropriate relief before the appropriate forum.

¶9

Order Date :- 21.2.2023/AKShukla/-

¶10

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

Thakurdin and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thakurdin and Another 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

Ishwar Chand and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Ismail Khan Vs State of U P and 7 Others

Om Prakash Vs State of U.P. and 10 Others

Tribhwan Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Isharawati and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Akhilesh Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. and Another