Smt. Rajshree Jain(Presently Smt. Rajshree Kothari) Vs Vishal Shrishrimal Jain

¶1

1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

W.P.(C) No. 379 of 2024

¶5

Smt. Rajshree Jain (presently Smt. Rajshree Kothari), wife of Late Shri Jitendra Jain (presently married to Shri Narendra Kothari), aged about 53 years, resident of 21 South Avenue, Choubey Colony, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, through her Power-of-Attorney, Shri Shailendra Jain, son of Shri Swaroopchand Jain, aged about 57 years, resident of 21 South Avenue, Choubey Colony, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

Vishal Shrishrimal Jain, son of Shri Kushalchand Shrishrimal Jain, aged about 40 years

¶9

Gaurav Shrishrimal Jain, son of Shri Kushalchand Shrishmal Jain, aged about 37 years

¶10

Both respondent Nos. 1 and 2 residents of Station Road, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh

¶11

State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of Revenue and Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶12

Tehsildar Patan, Patan, Block Patan, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶13

Shri Prakash Soni, Tehsildar Patan, Patan, Block Patan, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶14

---- Respondents

¶15

For Petitioner	: Mr. Amrito Das, Advocate
For Respondents/State	: Mr. Shashank Thakur,
	Deputy Advocate General

¶16

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

¶17

06.02.2024

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the order has been

¶19

passed by the Tehsildar, Patan, Block Patan, District Durg, whereby an application moved by respondents No. 1 and 2 for correction of revenue records has been allowed and the names of respondents No. 1 and 2 have been recorded. He would further submit that taking benefit of such entry, respondents No. 1 and 2 may create third-party interest or may alienate the property, whereas the petitioner has equal right over the property in question. He would further argue that earlier there was an interim order in favour of the petitioner passed by the Board of Revenue and the case was fixed for the final hearing on 08.01.2024, but again it was adjourned but the

¶20

2

¶21

interim order was not extended. He would further argue that if respondents No. 1 and 2 alienate the property, the petitioner would suffer irreparably. He would also submit that the order passed by the Tehsildar is appealable according to Section 44 of the CG. Land Revenue Code.

¶22

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would submit that an efficacious alternative remedy is available to the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the order passed by the Tehsildar, therefore, the present petition is not maintainable.

¶23

Taking into consideration the fact that the order is appealable one according to provisions of Section 44 of the CG. Land Revenue Code, the present petition is not maintainable. However, considering the fact that earlier interim relief was granted by the Board of Revenue in Case No. RN/05/RA6/234/2023 vide order dated 26.07.2023, but later on, the same was not extended on 08.01.2024, therefore, this petition is disposed of reserving the liberty in favour of the petitioner to prefer an appeal before the Appellate Authority against the order passed by the Tehsildar dated 04.01.2024. The petitioner would also be at liberty to move an appropriate application for the grant of stay within 15 days and if the petitioner prefers a duly constituted appeal along with an application for the grant of stay, it is expected that the Appellate Authority shall decide the application for grant of stay in an objective manner within a further period of 30 days, till then status quo which exists today shall be maintained by the parties. If no appeal is preferred by the petitioner, this order shall lose its efficacy.

¶24

With the aforesaid observation(s)/direction(s), this petition stands disposed of.

¶25

Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶26

vatti

Smt. Rajshree Jain(Presently Smt. Rajshree Kothari) v. Vishal Shrishrimal Jain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Rajshree Jain(Presently Smt. Rajshree Kothari) v. Vishal Shrishrimal Jain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Panawati Shrivas Vs Chairman Cum Managing Director S.E.C.L

Hemlal Shikari Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Subhashni Sahu @ Subhash Tandon Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Aastha Buildcon Vs Chhattisgarh State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd.

Banshilal Vs Deputy Registrar

Shiv Kumar Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh