Dismissed

Mistt. Sunaina Devi and Anr. v. Md. Jamal Hasan and Anr.

Patna HC25 Jun 2013CWJC/21158/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an Article 227 writ application, petitioners sought to exclude properties included in a pending title partition suit. The Court held that such relief cannot be granted under Article 227 and directed petitioners to approach the appropriate civil forum.

What did the court decide?

Writ application disposed of as relief under Article 227 is not maintainable; petitioners directed to approach civil forum.

Mistt. Sunaina Devi and Anr. Vs Md. Jamal Hasan and Anr. — Property and Title | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21158 of 2012

¶2

====================================================== 1. Mostt. Sunaina Devi Wife Of Late Rambilash Singh Resident Of VillageKool, P.O., P.S. And District- Nalanda 2. Mostt. Malti Devi Wife Of Late Upendra Singh Resident Of VillageKool, P.O., P.S. And District- Nalanda .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. Md. Jamal Hasan Son Of Late Ali Hasan Resident Of Village- Mohanpur Tola, Panhesa, P.O., P.S. And District- Nalanda 2. Safique Khatoon D/O Late Ali Hasan Resident Of Village- Mohanpur Tola, Panhesa, P.O., P.S. And District- Nalanda .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satya Ranjan Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶3

2 25-06-2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitionesr and learned counsel for the State of Bihar. The prayer which has been made in the present application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is to call upon the respondents to show cause as to why Plot Nos. 1657, 1665 of Khata No. 291 and Plot Nos. 1800,1806 and 1807 of Khata No. 297 of Village Kool District- Nalanda may not be deleted/excluded from Title Partition Suit No. 153 of 2012 pending in the Court of Sub-Judge-I, Biharshariff at Nalanda. Respondents are plaintiffs in the said Partition Suit No. 153 of 2012

¶4

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the

¶5

Patna High Court CWJC No.21158 of 2012 (2) dt.25-06-2013

¶6

2 / 2

¶7

properties as noted above, were purchased in the name of these petitioners long back and they have been continuing in possession of the properties ever since they purchased the same. Learned counsel submits that the properties had been included as suit property by the Respondents/plaintiffs in Title Partition Suit No. 153 of 2012 maliciously and will create unnecessary complications regarding petitioners’ title over such property.

¶8

In my opinion, such relief cannot be granted in exercise of power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners can approach appropriate forum under law to seek their remedy.

¶9

The writ application is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶10

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J)

¶11

Arun Kumar/-

Mistt. Sunaina Devi and Anr. v. Md. Jamal Hasan and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mistt. Sunaina Devi and Anr. v. Md. Jamal Hasan and Anr.

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

Jamila Bibi Vs Husain Ara Begam and Ors.

Suresh Prasad Yadav Vs Bishundeo Rai and Anr.

Smt. Sharda Devi Vs Chandra Prakash Gupta and Ors.

Ganesh Sahu Vs Ashok Kumar and Ors.

Raj Bansh Ram Vs Lalan Ram and Ors.

Anil Kumar Jain Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.