Disposed

Durgesh Singh v. Shri G. Infrastructure

Chhattisgarh HC10 Aug 2021WP227/379/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought relief for erroneous mutation and pending demarcation in a disputed property case. The court disposed of the writ petition at the motion stage, directing the S.D.O. to expedite the pending appeal within two months and stay demarcation proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Direct stopping of demarcation proceedings and issuing a stay order until the pending appeal in the parties property dispute is concluded by the Sub-Division Officer along with an order expediting the

Durgesh Singh Vs Shri G. Infrastructure — Property and Title | Chhattisgarh HC (2021)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

W.P.(227) No.379 of 2021

¶4

Durgesh Singh S/o Late Shri Ramchandra Singh Aged About 43 Years R/o Lingiyadih, Tahsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶5

---- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Shri G. Infrastructure Through Its Partner Sourabh Sonchatra, S/o Shashikant Sonchatra, R/o Sonchatra Complex, PGBT College Road, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶9

Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶10

Tahsildar Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶11

---- Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner – Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate.

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant

Order on Board

10-08-2021

Heard.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is the owner of landed property bearing Khasra No.15/42. The respondent No.1 has made purchase the property bearing Khasra No.15/148 measuring 0.4050 hectare. The description of the adjacent properties in the sale deed of favour of respondent No.1 is erroneous which shows the properties of the petitioner included in the sale made for the respondent No.1. The petitioner had objected to the mutation

¶18

-2-

¶19

proceeding, however, the Tehsildar has passed mutation order in favour of the respondent No.1. The petitioner has challenged the mutation order in appeal before S.D.O. but the same is pending. In the meanwhile, the respondent No.1 has initiated for demarcation of the disputed property. Therefore, this petition has been brought with a prayer for issuance of direction and also for protection of the interest of the petitioner.

¶20

Considered on the submissions and after perusal of the documents filed along with the petition, this petition is disposed off at the motion stage. The learned S.D.O. Respondent No.3 is directed to expedite the hearing in the appeal filed by the petitioner challenging the order of Tehsildar and decide the same within a period of two months. In the meanwhile, it is also ordered that the demarcation proceeding if any initiated for the property in the dispute, shall be kept in abeyance till the hearing of the appeal before the Court of S.D.O. is concluded.

¶21

Accordingly, this petition stands disposed off.

¶22

Certified copy today.

¶23

Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant)

¶24

Judge

¶25

Monika

Durgesh Singh v. Shri G. Infrastructure

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Durgesh Singh v. Shri G. Infrastructure

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

Jeetbahan Ram Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Lakshman Pardhi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Santosh Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Ruhi Agrawal Vs Nimish Agrawal

Mohammad Iqubal Khan Vs Public in General

Suraj Bali @ Ramkali Vs State of Chhattisgarh