Dismissed¶8

Ashwani Kulmitra v. Ashwani Kumar Agrawal

Chhattisgarh HC5 Mar 2025WPC/1104/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court Bilaspur; WPC No. 1104 of 2025; 2025:CGHC:11003; order dated 06/03/2025; Bibhu Datta Guru, J.; Ashwani Kulmitra v. Ashwani Kumar Agrawal; eviction warrant 06/01/2025; encroachment application; Nayab Tahsildar Takhatpur; Collector Bilaspur; Commissioner Bilaspur Division; Revision No.35/A-68/2023-24; Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC; civil suit pending; no interim order; injunction application rejected; reply not considered; dismissed at motion stage; alternative remedy.

What did the court decide?

The order impugned passed by the Commissioner is just and proper; there is no infirmity or illegality in it, as the petitioner's application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC was rejected by the trial Court in his own civil suit. ¶7

Ashwani Kulmitra Vs Ashwani Kumar Agrawal — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶8

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of the respondent authorities (interim order dated 26/07/2023, revisional order dated 29/11/2024 and eviction warrant dated 06/01/2025) is illegal, arbitrary and beyond jurisdiction despite the civil suit between the parties being pending before the competent civil Court.

¶3

Ratio / Principle

¶7

Key takeaways

If the petitioner is aggrieved by the rejection of his application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC, he may challenge the same in an appropriate forum.obiter¶7
The Commissioner rightly dismissed the revision as the civil suit filed by the petitioner is pending consideration before the competent jurisdictional Civil Court.ratio¶7
On consideration of the entire fact situation, the petitioner failed to establish his case by placing sufficient and cogent material; the writ petition fails and is dismissed at the motion stage itself.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Chhattisgarh High Court (Bilaspur), single Judge (Bibhu Datta Guru, J.), order dated 06/03/2025 in WPC No. 1104 of 2025 — writ petition DISMISSED at the motion stage. The petitioner, owner of Khasra No.52/1 (renumbered 52/8), area 0.057 hectare, village Junapara P.H. No.2, R.I. Circle Takhatpur, District Bilaspur, purchased on 05/07/2019, challenged (i) the eviction warrant dated 06/01/2025 and (ii) the order dated 29/11/2024 passed by the Commissioner, Bilaspur Division in Revision No.35/A-68/2023-24, arising out of an encroachment application filed by respondent No.1. Procedural chain: interim order dated 26/07/2023 by the Nayab Tahsildar (without hearing the petitioner) — appeal dismissed by Collector on 20/03/2024 — revision dismissed by Divisional Commissioner on 29/11/2024 — eviction warrant dated 06/01/2025; petitioner's reply of 16/01/2025 not considered. The Court held the Commissioner's order 'just and proper' with no infirmity or illegality, noting that although the petitioner's civil suit was pending, there was no interim order therein, his application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC had been rejected by the trial Court, and the Tahsildar and Additional Collector had rightly passed their orders; the petitioner was left free to challenge the injunction rejection in an appropriate forum. Finding that the petitioner failed to establish his case with sufficient and cogent material, the petition was dismissed at the motion stage itself.

¶1

¶2

2025:CGHC:11003

¶3

AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.03.07 10:30:51 +0530

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1104 of 2025

¶5

NAFR

¶6

1 - Ashwani Kulmitra S/o Ganpat Kurmi, Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Khatoliya, Tahsil Takhatpur And District Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶7

... Petitioner(s)

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - Ashwani Kumar Agrawal S/o Bharat Agrawal R/o Village Bhimpuri, Tahsil Takhatpur District Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶10

2 - Commissioner, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶11

3 - Collector, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶12

4 - Nayab Tahsildar, Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶13

... Respondent(s)

¶14

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikash Kumar Pandey with Mr. T. R. Patel, Advocates. For Respondents/State : Mr. Anmol Sharma, Panel Lawyer.

¶15

Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge

¶16

Order on Board

¶17

06/03/2025

¶18

By the present petition, the petitioner is seeking quashment of the eviction warrant dated 06/01/2025 issued by the respondent No.4 and also seeking quashment of the order dated 29/11/2024 passed by the Commissioner, Bilaspur Division in Revision No.35/A-68/2023-24.

¶19

¶20

(A) Case of the petitioner, as projected in the writ petition, is that the petitioner is the owner of land bearing Khasra No.52/1 area of 0.057 hectare situated at village Junapara P.H. No.2, R.I. Circle Takhatpur, District Bilaspur. The same was purchased by him on 05/07/2019, thereafter, the Khasra number renumbered as 52/8. According to the petitioner, when the persons namely Amit and Meena tried to interfere in the peaceful possession of the petitioner, he filed a civil suit before the competent jurisdictional civil Court, which is pending consideration.

¶21

(B) During pendency of the said civil suit, the respondent No.1 herein filed an application before the respondent No.4 alleging that the petitioner is encroaching upon his land. On the basis of which, the respondent No.4 without hearing the petitioner, passed the interim order dated 26/07/2023. Against the said order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Collector, who vide order dated 20/03/2024 dismissed the same. Thereagainst, the petitioner filed a revision before the Divisional Commissioner, which has also been dismissed by the order impugned dated 29/11/2024. Thereafter, the respondent No.2 issued the impugned eviction warrant dated 06/01/2025 for removing the construction raised by the petitioner. The petitioner submitted his reply before the respondent No.4 on 16/01/2025, but till date, the same has not been considered. Thus, this petition.

¶22

¶23

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the impugned action taken by the respondent authorities is illegal and arbitrary and while passing the impugned order, they exceeded the jurisdictional, despite the fact that the matter is pending before the competent jurisdictional civil Court.

¶24

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State while supporting the impugned order and the eviction warrant would submit that the same have rightly been passed.

¶25

I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents.

¶26

From bare perusal of the order dated 29/11/2024 passed by the Divisional Commissioner in the revision filed by the petitioner, it is manifest that the Commissioner after appreciating all the facts and circumstances of the case in its true perspective observed that though the petitioner filed the civil suit, but there is no interim order in the said suit and the application filed by the petitioner under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of the CPC has also been rejected and the matter has been fixed for evidence. It has also been observed that the Tahsildar and the Additional Collector have rightly passed the orders.

¶27

The order impugned passed by the Commissioner is just and proper. There is no infirmity and illegality in the said order, as the application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of the CPC has

¶28

¶29

been rejected by the trial Court in a civil suit filed by the petitioner. If the petitioner is aggrieved by rejection of application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC, he may challenge the same in an appropriate forum. The Commissioner has rightly dismissed the revision as the civil suit filed by the petitioner is pending consideration before the competent jurisdictional Civil Court.

¶30

Having considered the entire facts situation of the case, in my opinion, the petitioner failed to establish his case by placing sufficient and cogent material. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed at the motion stage itself.

¶31

SD/-

¶32

(Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge

¶33

Amardeep

Ashwani Kulmitra v. Ashwani Kumar Agrawal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashwani Kulmitra v. Ashwani Kumar Agrawal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N.K. Kashyap Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jayprakash Gulwani Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Raju @ Umakant Tandia Vs State of Chhattisgarh

College of Nursing, Modern Medical Institute Vs State of Chhattisgarh

M/S Shree Baijnath Timber Trading Company Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mohammad Taufeeq Memon Vs State of Chhattisgarh