Ranjeet Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Ranjeet Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Delay of 144 days in filing the appeal condoned (I.A. No.8158 of 2025 disposed of); the L.P.A. disposed of with the observation that the question of title of land can be determined only by a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction and not by the revenue court, and that any determination/finding given by the revenue court would not bind the Civil Court.

Issue for consideration

Whether sufficient cause exists to condone the delay of 144 days in filing L.P.A. No.416 of 2025. +2 more

Court's answer

Sufficient cause was found to condone the delay of 144 days that had crept up in filing of the appeal; ordered accordingly, and I.A. No.8158 of 2025 stands disposed of.

Ratio / Principle

Having gone through the judgment of the learned Writ Court (dated 28th June, 2024 in W.P.(C) No.1098 of 2023), this Court found no infirmity in the said judgment.

Key takeaways

As regards the question of title of land, the same can only be determined by a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction and not by the revenue court; consequently, any determination/finding given by the revenue court would otherwise not bind the Civil Court adjudicating the claim of title.ratio¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

L.P.A. No.416 of 2025, High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi (Order No.02 dated 10.12.2025; Tarlok Singh Chauhan, C.J. and Rajesh Shankar, J.): The delay of 144 days in filing the appeal was condoned for the reasons stated in I.A. No.8158 of 2025, which stands disposed of. The Division Bench went through the judgment passed by the learned Writ Court on 28th June, 2024 in W.P.(C) No.1098 of 2023 — whereby the appellant/petitioner was relegated to the Civil Court to establish his right, title, interest and possession with regard to the property in question on the ground that there are disputed questions of fact — and found no infirmity in it. Meeting the appellant's apprehension that a finding recorded by the Circle Officer, Dhanwar, District-Giridih with regard to fraud etc. being played by him might come in the way of the Civil Court while adjudicating the claim of title, the Bench observed that as regards the question of title of land, the same can only be determined by a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction and not by the revenue court, so any determination of finding given by the revenue court would otherwise not bind the Civil Court. With this observation, the present LPA stood disposed of.

2025:JHHC:37095-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI L.P.A. No.416 of 2025

Ranjeet Yadav, son of Late Mangar Yadav, resident of Murudih, P.O. & P.S. Dhanwar, District-Giridih.

.......... Appellant.

-Versus-

The State of Jharkhand.

The Deputy Commissioner, Giridih.

The Circle Officer, Dhanwar, Giridih.

Dwarika Prasad Yadav, son of Bikhari Yadav.

Basudeo Ravidas, son of Mahabir Ravidas. Nos.4 and 5 both are resident of Murudih, P.O. & P.S. Dhanwar, District-Giridih.

.......... Respondents.

CORAM : HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

----For the Appellant : Mr. Shubham Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ajit Kumaj, AC to G.A.-V ----- Order No.02 Date: 10.12.2025

I.A. No.8158 of 2025:

For the reasons stated in the present interlocutory application, we find sufficient cause to condone the delay of 144 days that

has crept up in filing of this appeal.

Ordered accordingly.

I.A. No.8158 of 2025 stands disposed of.

L.P.A. No.416 of 2025:

Notice.

Mr. Ajit Kumar, A.C. to G.A.-V appears and waives notice on behalf of the respondent nos.1 to 3.

Looking to the nature of the order, it is not necessary to issue notice to the private respondents.

The instant appeal has been filed against the judgment passed by the learned Writ Court on 28^th June, 2024 in W.P.(C) No.1098

1

2025:JHHC:37095-DB

of 2023, whereby the appellant/petitioner has been relegated to the Civil Court to establish his right, title, interest and possession with regard to the property in question on the ground that there are disputed questions of fact.

Having gone through the judgment, we find no infirmity in the said judgment. However, the learned counsel for the appellant would argue that since there is finding recorded by the Circle Officer, Dhanwar, District-Giridih with regard to fraud etc. being played by the appellant, therefore, he is apprehensive that such finding may come in the way of the Civil Court while adjudicating the claim of title.

We only need to observe that as regards the question of title of land, the same can only be determined by a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction and not by the revenue court, so any determination of finding given by the revenue court would otherwise not bind the Civil Court.

With the said observation, the present LPA is disposed of.

(Tarlok Singh Chauhan, C.J.)

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

10^th December, 2025 Sanjay/Rohit

2