Dismissed

Ajay Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC9 Oct 2023WPC/1555/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition was disposed of holding that the court cannot interfere with the mutation order or restrain the purchaser in peaceful possession. The court noted the availability of alternative remedy under general law and directed the petitioner to pursue the matter before the concerned authority.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of. The petitioner is given liberty to pursue the matter before the concerned authority.

Ajay Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand — Property and Title | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W. P. (C) No.1555 of 2023

¶3

Ajay Kumar . .... .. ... Petitioner(s)

¶4

Versus

¶5

1.The State of Jharkhand.

¶6

2.The Deputy Commissioner, Chaibasa, West Singhbhum 3.The L.R.D.C., Chaibasa, West Singhbhum 4.The Anchal Adhikari, Nowamundi, West Singhbhum 5.Laxmi Nayak

¶7

6.Kishore Prasad

¶8

.. ... ..Respondent(s)

¶9

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶10

......... For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arbind Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. J. F. Toppo, GA.V Mrs. M. Chatterjee, AC to GA.V For the Resp. 6 : Mr. Rohit Roy, Advocate

¶11

04/ 09.10.2023 . I.A. No.8691 of 2023.

¶12

Heard, learned counsel for the respondent no. 6 on the aforesaid I.A. filed for

¶13

accepting the vakalatnama.

¶14

Considering the same, prayer made in the said IA is allowed.

¶15

The aforesaid I.A. stands allowed.

¶16

W. P. (C) No.1555 of 2023.

¶17

Heard, learned counsel for the parties.

¶18

The instant Writ Petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 19.01.2023 (Annexure-8) passed by LRDC, Jagarnathpur in Mutation Appeal No.02 of 2021 whereby and whereunder the said appeal has been dismissed.

¶19

For further prayer for quashing the order dated 05.03.2021 (Annexure-3) passed by the Anchal Adhikari, Nowamundi in Mutation Case No.33 / R 27/202021 whereby and whereunder the land, in question has been mutated in the name of Respondent no.6.

¶20

Brief facts of the case is that Respondent no.5 had entered into an agreement of sale with the petitioner on 23.11.2019 for sale of land comprising an area of 2 Acres 87 decimals under different plots of Mauza- Mahudi (Pachasai), ThanaKolhan, Thana No.744 under Khata No.134, Plot Nos.1474, 1475, 1477 & 1479. After receiving the consideration amount of Rs.8,55,000/-, the respondent no.5 illegally transferred the said land in favour of respondent no.6. After the said transfer, the land was mutated in the name of respondent no.6 and against which, the petitioner filed the said Appeal.

¶21

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the matter is pending before the revisional Court i.e. Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum in Mutation Revision Case No.52 of 2023-24. But despite the pendency, Respondent

¶22

-2-

¶23

no.6 is demarcating the said land.

¶24

Possession follows title is the settled law. From the pleadings of the petitioner, it is apparent that the sale-deed with respect to the said plot of land has been executed by the land owner (Respondent no.5) in favour of Respondent no.6. Petitioner is aggrieved by the said sale and subsequent mutation of the land in the name of purchaser (respondent no.6).

¶25

Under the circumstance this Court is of the view that the writ Court cannot interfere with the impugned order and restrain the respondent no.6 in his peaceful possession. Petitioner has efficacious and alternative remedy under the general law and is at liberty to pursue the same.

¶26

The instant Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶27

However, the petitioner will be at liberty to pursue the matter before the concerned authority.

¶28

( Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J. )

¶29

Sandeep/

¶30

Uploaded

Ajay Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

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

Dr Bhoomika Sachacher Vs Union of India through Director General of Health Services

Sanjay Tandi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pradeep Kumar Tandon Alias Pradeep Tandon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Krishna Kant Dubey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bijendra Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shivdutt Sharma Vs the State of Jharkhand