Dismissed

Mu. Sumana Begum v. Addl. Distt. and Session Judge Sitapur and 5 Others

Allahabad HC12 Jul 2024A227/3187/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging an injunction-related order in a land dispute; after respondent's counsel noted non-disclosure of demarcation proceedings under the U.P. Revenue Code, petitioner sought withdrawal and the petition was dismissed as not pressed.

What the court decided

AI extract

Mu. Sumana Begum vs Addl. Distt. and Session Judge… — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:48248

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3187 of 2024 Petitioner :- Mu. Sumana Begum

¶4

Respondent :- Addl. Distt. And Session Judge Sitapur And 5 Others

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Shiv Sharan Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Ghaus Beg

¶6

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶7

The present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner for setting aside the order dated 28.02.2024 passed by the Additional District and Sessions F.T.C (New), Sitapur; and with a prayer to confirm the injunction order dated 18.10.2022 passed in favour of the petitioner by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mahmoodabad, Sitapur, in Civil Suit No. 192 of 2022, Sumana Begum versus Ram Kishore and others, filed by the petitioner for permanent injunction restraining the respondent not to interfere on the land in possession of the petitioner.

¶8

On the other hand, Shri Ghaus Beg, learned counsel for respondent no. 2 and 6 has submitted that the petitioner has not approached this court with clean hands and has not disclosed the fact that an application under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (hereinafter referred as Code, 2006) i.e for demarcation of the boundaries was preferred by the petitioner on 13.04.2017 and in the said case, a demarcation report between the agricultural land of the petitioner and the respondent was submitted on 20.11.2019 against the petitioner which was objected by the petitioner by filing his objection and after considering the objections filed by the petitioner, the demarcation report submitted by the Tehsildar was accepted by the Deputy Collector, (Judicial) Mahmoodabad by its order dated 20.06.2024, but this fact has also not been disclosed.

¶9

It is further submitted that the petitioner cannot avail two simultaneous remedy at the same time particularly, when the remedy of suit filing before the Civil Court is barred by Section 206 of the Code, 2006.

¶10

At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the present writ petition as dismissed as not pressed.

¶11

As prayed, the present writ petition is dismissed as not pressed.

¶12

Order Date :- 16.7.2024 DiVYa

¶13

Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mu. Sumana Begum v. Addl. Distt. and Session Judge Sitapur and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Mu. Sumana Begum v. Addl. Distt. and Session Judge Sitapur and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Nizamuddin and Others Vs State of U.P.through Collector Gonda and Others

Jia Lal Kori Vs District Magistrate Amethi Distt. Amethi and 4 Others

Kisan Majdoor Mahavidhlaya Bhiti Distt. Mau Thru. Its Manager and Another Vs State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission Lko. and 2 Others

Brijesh Kumar vs Shri Nitin Basal, District Magistrate, Distt. Pratapgarh and Another

Dr. Ashok Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Sona Devi and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another