Justice Chandra Bhushan Bajpai dismissed a writ petition under Article 227 challenging an order refusing to stay revenue mutation proceedings. The court held the applicant failed to make a prima facie case.
Order dated 03.9.2015 affirmed; writ petition dismissed at motion stage; lower court directed to dispose within six months.
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.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (227) No.1043 of 2015
Lalan Prasad S/o Narvedeshwar Prasad, Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Chandi, P. S. Trikunda District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh......................Applicant
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Smt. Purna Kumari W/o Narvedeshwar Prasad, Aged About 70 Years R/o Village Chandi, P. S. Trikunda, District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh......................Non Applicant
2. Sadhusharan Jaiswal, S/o Ramavtar Sao, Aged About 80 Years R/o Village Chowkdi, P. S. Husainabad, District Palamu ( Jharkhand).....................Non Applicant
3. Taradevi, W/o Late Ramchandra Prasad Jaiswal, Aged About 70 Years R/o Village Nabinagar, P. S. Nabinagar, District Aurangabad ( Bihar)......................Non Applicant
4. Usha Devi, D/o Ramchandra Prasad Jaiswal, Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Nabinagar, P. S. Nabinagar, District Aurangabad ( Bihar)......................Non Applicant
5. Geeta Devi, D/o Ramchandra Prasad Jaiswal, Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Nabinagar, P. S. Nabinagar, District Aurangabad ( Bihar)......................Non Applicant
6. Shoba Devi, D/o Ramchandra Prasad Jaiswal, Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Nabinagar, P. S. Nabinagar, District Aurangabad ( Bihar)......................Non Applicant
7. Lalita Devi D/o Ramchandra Prasad Jaiswal, Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Nabinagar, P. S. Nabinagar, District Aurangabad ( Bihar)......................Non Applicant
8. Ishwari Prasad S/o Madho Prasad, Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Chandi, P. S. Trikunda, District Balrampur, (Chhattisgarh)......................Non Applicant
9. Satyendra S/o Late Madho Prasad, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Chandi, P. S. Trikunda, District Balrampur, (Chhattisgarh)......................Non Applicant
10. Mahendra S/o Late Madho Prasad, Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Chandi, P. S. Trikunda, District Balrampur, (Chhattisgarh)......................Non Applicant
11. Shankar Prasad, S/o Jamuna Prasad, Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Pandri, Post Pandri, Tahsil Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh...................Non Applicant
12. Rambha D/o Shankar Prasad, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Pandri, Post Pandri, Tahsil Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh...................Non Applicant
2
13. Munni, D/o Shankar Prasad, Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Pandri, Post Pandri, Tahsil Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh...................Non Applicant
14. Kaushalya, D/o Shankar Prasad, Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Pandri, Post Pandri, Tahsil Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh...................Non Applicant
15. Rashmi D/o Shankar Prasad, Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Pandri, Post Pandri, Tahsil Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh...................Non Applicant
16. Shoba Devi, W/o Kaushalchand, Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Shahpur, District Palamu ( Jharkhand)......................Non Applicant
17. Manjudevi, W/o Uditnarayan, Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Arjhat, Post Arjhat, Tahsil Dudhi, District Sonbadra ( Uttar Pradesh)...........................Non Applicant
18. Buji Devi W/o Arvind Kumar, Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Sonpur, Tahsil Pratappur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh....................Non Applicant
19. Smt. Akash Devi, W/o Jairam Thakur, Aged About 50 Years R/o Nagar Ramanujganj, Ward No. 4, Tahsil Ramanujganj, District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh........................Non Applicant
20. Shri Rajeshwar Singh, S/o Laxman Singh Rajput, Aged About 52 Years R/o Ramanujganj, P. S. And Tahsil Ramanujganj, District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh.........................Non Applicant
21. Raja, S/o Lochan, Aged About 50 Years R/o Pushouli, District Taimur, Jharkhand..........................Non Applicant
22. Satyanarayan S/o Vishwanath, Aged About 40 Years R/o Wadrafnagar, P. S. And Tahsil Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh...........................Non Applicant
23. Bhikam, S/o Lochan, Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Pushouli, District Taimur, Jharkhand......................Non Applicant
24. Chandradev Choubey, S/o Birgu Choubey, Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Hur, P. S. And District Garhwa, Jharkhand.......................Non Applicant
25. Laxmikant Pandey, S/o Narmada Pandey, Aged About 60 Years R/o Nagar Ramanujganj, P. S. And Tahsil Ramanujganj, District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh...............................Non Applicant
26. Jairam, S/o Lochan Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Pushouli, District Taimur, Jharkhand......................Non Applicant
27. Tahsildar, Tahsil Ramanujganj, District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh.......................Non Applicant
28. Sub Registrar, Registrar Office Ramanujganj, District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh.....................Non Applicant
29. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Collector Balrampur, District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh..........................Non Applicant
---- Respondents
3
Shri CJK Rao, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Lav Sharma, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents 27 to 29.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Chandra Bhushan Bajpai Order On Board
04.01.2016.
Heard.
2. By filing the instant writ petition before this Court, the petitioner has invoked Article 227 of the Constitution of India and submitted that in an application filed by the petitioner under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'the Code') in MJC No.12/12, the Additional District Judge, Ramanujganj vide order dated 03.9.2015 dismissed the prayer of the petitioner for staying the proceedings before the Tahsildar, Wadrafnagar regarding mutation. The said MJC was filed by the petitioner/applicant for restoration of Civil Suit No.39A/11 (old number of the civil suit No.6A/06) which was dismissed for want of prosecution on 25.11.2011 by the First Additional District Judge, Ramanujganj under Order 9 Rule 9 of the Code.
3. Prayer for staying the proceedings pending before Revenue Court was denied by the Court below vide impugned order dated 03.9.15 on the ground that the said application for staying the proceedings of the mutation has been filed after 2 ½ months and also the legal heirs Ramchandra Jaiswal was not noticed for their representation in the matter.
4 . On due consideration, I do not see any illegality or impropriety in the impugned order dated 03.9.2015 under which the Court below rejected the prayer to stay the proceedings before the Revenue Court in the matter pending before the Court below under Order 9 Rule 9 of the
4
Code. The instant petition is not worth for admission as the petitioner has failed to make out prima facie case for admission and further hearing.
5 . Consequently, the instant WP(227) is dismissed at the motion stage itself. However, the Court below is directed to expedite the matter and dispose of the same as early as possible preferably within a period of six months from the next date of hearing. The petitioners are also directed to cooperate in the proceedings before the Court below required as per law. The petitioner may file certified copy of the the order before the Court below for compliance.
6. The instant petition is disposed of. No order as to cost.
7. Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/(Chandra Bhushan Bajpai) JUDGE
Bini
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petitioner made a prima facie case for staying the revenue proceedings pending before the Additional District Judge.
Whether the impugned order dismissing the prayer to stay proceedings was illegal or improper.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Lalan Prasad
State Of Chhattisgarh
Chandra Bhushan Bajpai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
