Disposed¶45

Ramji Suryavanshi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC3 Apr 2025WPC/130/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court, Bilaspur; WPC No. 130 of 2024; mutation dispute; Sections 109, 110 Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code; Tahsildar Pamgarh; Sub Divisional Officer; Additional Commissioner Bilaspur Division; Board of Revenue revision; will deed; relinquishment deed; jurisdiction of Revenue Court vis-a-vis Civil Court; Hindu Succession Act, 1955; Article 226; petition disposed with liberty to approach Civil Court; Judge Amitendra Kishore Prasad; order dated 04.04.2025.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to either of the parties to approach the concerned Civil Court for redressal of their grievance, if any; the writ relief of quashing the Board of Revenue order dated 18.10.2023 was not granted. ¶45

Ramji Suryavanshi Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Succession and Inheritance | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

¶1

Digitally signed YOGESH by YOGESHTIWARI TIWARI Date: 2025.04.08 13:48:26 +0530

NAFR

2025:CGHC:15913

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

WPC No. 130 of 2024

¶7

1 - Ramji Suryavanshi S/o Late Madho Prasad Suryavanshi Aged About 74 Years R/o Village- Khairagih, Tahsil- Pamgarh,, District : JanjgirChampa, Chhattisgarh

¶8

2 - Prakash Suryavanshi S/o Late Madho Prasad Suryavanshi Aged About 66 Years R/o Village- Khairagih, Tahsil- Pamgarh,, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

¶9

... Petitioners

¶10

versus

¶11

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur,, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶12

2 - The Board of Revenue Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur,, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶13

3 - The Additional Commissioner Bilaspur Division,, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶14

4 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Pamgarh,, District : JanjgirChampa, Chhattisgarh

¶15

5 - The Tahsildar Pamgarh,, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

¶16

6 - Poshan Banjare S/o Late Vijay Kumar Suryavanshi R/o VillageKhairadih, Tahsil- Pamgarh, Distt- Janjgir- Champa, CG

¶17

7 - Narendra S/o Late Vijay Kumar Suryavanshi R/o Village- Khairadih, Tahsil- Pamgarh, Distt- Janjgir- Champa, CG

¶18

8 - Roshan S/o Late Vijay Kumar Suryavanshi R/o Village- Khairadih, Tahsil- Pamgarh, Distt- Janjgir- Champa, CG

¶19

¶20

9 - Smt. Terash Bai Wd/o Vijay Kumar Suryavanshi R/o VillageKhairadih, Tahsil- Pamgarh, Distt- Janjgir- Champa, CG

¶21

... Respondents

¶22

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

¶23

For Petitioners :	Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Advocate
For State :	Ms. Nupoor Sonkar, Panel Lawyer
For Respondents No.6 to 9 :	Mr. Somnath Verma, Advocate

¶24

Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge

¶25

Order on Board

¶26

04.04.2025

¶27

1 Heard Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Patel, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Ms. Nupoor Sonkar, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/respondents No.1 to 5 and Mr. Somnath Verma, learned counsel appearing for respondents No.6 to 9.

¶28

2 The instant petition is preferred by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution with the following relief(s):-

¶29

“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court, may kindly call

¶30

for the entire record in relates to the case of the petitioner.

¶31

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court, may kindly be pleased to issued a writ /or writs/order/or orders/ to quashed the order dated 18.10.2023, (Annexure P/1), passed by the Board of Revenue Chhattisgarh Bilaspur, in

¶32

¶33

revenue revision case No.R.N./06/R/A-

¶34

6/252/2022, in the interest of justice.

¶35

10.3 That, any other relief, this Hon'ble Court, deem fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioners, in the interest of justice.

¶36

10.4 An affidavit in support of this petition is filed herewith.”

¶37

3 Brief facts of the case, are that the petitioners have filed an application under Section 109, 110 of Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code in respect of land bearing Khasra Nos.39/6, 39/9, 71/1, Rakba 0.194 Hectare, 0.304 Hectare, 0.356 Hectare situated at Village Khairadih, which was recorded in the name of private respondents, in which name of the Lakheshwari was wrongly entered and prayed that the name of petitioners and non applicant Vijay may be added before the Tahsildar Pamgarh, District JanjgirChampa (CG). The Tahsildar Pamgarh vide its order dated 28.10 2016 rejected the application of the petitioners and mutated the name of private respondent No.6 Pashan Banjare, on the basis of relinquishment deed. Against the said order dated 28.10.2016, the petitioners have filed revenue appeal bearing No.05/A-6/20162017 before the Sub Divisional Officer Pamgarh, District Janjgir Champa (CG) and The Sub Divisional Officer, Pamgarh vide its order dated 20.03.2017 allowed the appeal of the petitioners and

¶38

¶39

set-aside the order passed by the Tahsildar Pamgarh. Being aggrieved with the order dated 20.03.2017, private respondent No.6 Poshan Banjare, has filed the appeal bearing Case No. 5346/2021-2022 before the Additional Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur, which was allowed vide order dated 17.10 2022 and thereafter, the petitioners have filed the revenue revision case bearing No.R.N/06/R/A-6/252/2022 before the Board of Revenue, Bilaspur (CG) and Board of Revenue Bilaspur (CG) vide its order dated 18.10.2023, dismissed the revision petition while setting aside the order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer and affirmed the order passed by the Tahsildar and Additional Commissioner.

¶40

4 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties are relegating the matter which comes within the four corners of the civil jurisdiction and the Tahsildar, Pamgarh, District JanjgirChampa (CG) has passed an order dated 28.08.2016, which cannot be appreciated, as such, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Pamgarh has set aside the order passed by the Tahsildar vide its order dated 20.03.2017. He further submits that when an appeal was preferred before the Additional Commissioner, respondent No.6 Poshan Banjare had appeared before the Additional Commissioner, Bilaspur Division and has submitted a will deed dated 03.03.2021 executed by one Lakheshwari Bai as also a relinquish deed executed on 01.09.2025. He further submits that the impugned order dated 18.12 2023 is illegal, erroneous and contrary to the law as the learned Sub Divisional Officer and the

¶41

¶42

Board of Revenue have failed to appreciate the fact that the subject property is a ancestral property, therefore all the legal heirs are equal share over the property as per the Hindu Succession Act, 1955.

¶43

5 On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respective respondents opposed the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶44

6 Having heard the learned counsel for the parties as well as considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case as also from bare perusal of the entire documents, it is apparent that there appears to be involvement of will deed as well as relinquishment deed and also the requisite registration of relinquish deed, as such, in the considered opinion of this Court, all the deeds can be questioned and are in the domain of Civil Court. The Revenue Court cannot decide the dispute in their jurisdiction.

¶45

7 Taking into account the overall facts and circumstances of the case, instant petition is disposed of. However, liberty is granted in favour of either of the parties to approach before the concerned Civil Court for redressal of their grievance, if any.

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

(Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge

¶48

Yogesh

Ramji Suryavanshi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramji Suryavanshi v. State of Chhattisgarh

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. Yashoda Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mahobiya Singh Vs Savita

Government Employees Co-Operative House Building Society Limited Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Abdul Rauf Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vishnunath Joshi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mukesh Dilawar Vs State of Chhattisgarh