Dismissed

Ram Kumar Sah and Ors. v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC1 Oct 2012CWJC/12142/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court, in a civil writ jurisdiction matter concerning a dispute over land, dismissed the writ application prima facie. The Court opined that the petitioners lacked evidence of rights to extra land, their repeated prayers for re-measurement did not justify bail, and there was no indication of a decision rendered without an opportunity.

What did the court decide?

The writ application was dismissed with liberty to file an appeal before the appellate authority.

Ram Kumar Sah and Ors. Vs the State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Patna HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12142 of 2008

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Ram Kumar Sah

¶5

Uma Shankar Sah

¶6

Hari Shankar Sah

¶7

Radhey Shyam Sah

¶8

Ghanshyam Kumar Sah

¶9

All sons of deceased sole petitioner Nirsan Sah

¶10

Anar Kuwar, wife of late Nirsan Sah.

¶11

All residents of Jatwalia, P S – Kundwa Chainpur, District – East Champaran.

¶12

Sunita Devi, daughter of late Nirsan Sah, wife of Pramod Sah, resident of village – Marpa, Ishwardas, P.S. Majourganj, District - Sitamarhi

¶13

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus

¶14

The State of Bihar

¶15

The Circle Officer, Dhaka, East Champaran.

¶16

Jawahar Sah son of not known.

¶17

Ram Sundar Sah, son of not known

¶18

Both residents of village – Jalwalia, P S – Kundawa Chainpur, District – East Champaran, Motihari.

¶19

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

¶20

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binay Kant Mani Tripathi For the Respondent/s : Mr. (SC16)

¶21

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

10 01-10-2012 Heard counsel for the petitioners and counsel for the State

¶24

as also perused the original record.

¶25

In the given facts and circumstances, the Court is not inclined to entertain the writ application at this stage.

¶26

Petitioners may have remedy against the said order before the appellate authority to raise all these questions because prima facie, after perusing the original record the Court has found that it

¶27

Patna High Court CWJC No.12142 of 2008 (10) dt.01-10-2012

¶28

2 / 2

¶29

is a case of raising objection for the sake of objection. Petitioners have not produced any document and evidence which could show that they have a right to hang on extra piece and parcel of land which they have got, maybe out of a family settlement. Repeated prayer for re-measurement does not give them a right to be bailed out.

¶30

That could be a circumstance why the Court is of the opinion that no interference with the order in a writ jurisdiction is required to be taken as it is not a case of decision having been rendered without giving opportunity to them, which they are pleading now.

¶31

The writ application is dismissed with liberty to file appeal.

¶32

The question of limitation or waiver will be considered on an appropriate application being made by the petitioners before appellate authority.

¶33

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J)

¶34

R.K.Pathak/-

Ram Kumar Sah and Ors. v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Kumar Sah and Ors. v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

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

Sheolal Sah and Ors. Vs State

Durganand Pd. Vs State

Manoj Kumar Vs State and Ors.

Asha Devi Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Yogendra Singh @ Pd.Singh Vs State

Ram Bilash Acharya Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.