Dismissed

Puja Verma and Anr. v. The Patna Regional Development Authority Through Its Chairman and Ors.

Patna HC21 Apr 2016L.P.A/208/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Letters Patent Appeal involved a contention that acquired land was not part of the respondent's acquisition. The High Court affirmed that disputed questions of fact regarding land identification and demarcation belong to the civil court, thus dismissing the appeal. Additionally, an interlocutory application for condonation of delay was allowed.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of 30-day delay in filing appeal; Letters Patent Appeal dismissed; Interlocutory Application disposed of.

Puja Verma and Anr. Vs The Patna Regional Development… — Land Acquisition | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Letters Patent Appeal No.208 of 2015

¶3

Arising out of

¶4

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8488 of 2005

¶5

Along with

¶6

Interlocutory Application No.965 of 2015

¶7

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

¶8

Puja Verma D/o Late Maruti Prasad Verma

¶9

Sudha Verma W/o Maruti Prasad Verma and daughter of Professor Baidya Nath Sahay

¶10

Both residents of House No.139, Road No. 23, Sri Krishna Nagar, P.S. Budha Colony, District - Patna

¶11

.... .... Petitioners- Appellants

¶12

Versus

¶13

The Patna Regional Development Authority through its Chairman, Maurya Lok, Patna Police Station Kotwali, Patna.

¶14

The Vice Chairman, Patna Regional Development Authority, Maurya Lok, Patna Police Station Kotwali, Patna.

¶15

The Director, Patna Regional Development Authority, Maurya Lok, Patna Police Station Kotwali, Patna.

¶16

The District Land Acquisition Officer, District – Patna.

¶17

The Anchaladhikari, Patna Sadar, Patna.

¶18

Patel Grih Nirman Sahyog Samittee Limited through its Secretary, Muneshwar Prasad. Son of Late Sadhu Saran Sinha, R/o Rajendra Nagar, Patna, P.S. Kadamkuan, District – Patna.

¶19

The Patna Municipal Corporation through its Municipal Commissioner, Patna.

¶20

The Municipal Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation, Patna.

¶21

.... .... Respondents-Respondents

¶22

=========================================================== Appearance : For the Appellants : Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr.

¶23

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA

¶24

And

¶25

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH

¶26

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶27

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA)

¶28

Date: 21-04-2016

¶29

Re.: Interlocutory Application No.965 of 2015

¶30

The application is for condonation of delay of 30 days

¶31

in filing of the appeal.

¶32

Patna High Court LPA No.208 of 2015 dt.21-04-2016

¶33

2/3

¶34

For the reasons mentioned in the application, we find that sufficient cause is disclosed for condonation of delay. Consequently, the delay of 30 days in filing of the appeal is condoned.

¶35

Interlocutory Application stands disposed of

¶36

accordingly.

¶37

Re.: Letters Patent Appeal No.208 of 2015

¶38

The appellants claim to be the purchaser of land measuring 6 kathas 8 dhurs, i.e. about 20 decimals, of land comprising in Khesra no.462 from one Lalita Devi vide sale deed dated 18.10.1978. Land measuring 5.22 acres of Khesra no.462 became subject matter of acquisition by the State Government. The assertion of the appellants is that the land purchased by the appellants is not the subject matter of acquisition as their land is separate from the land which has been acquired.

¶39

The learned Single Bench has rightly found that disputed questions of fact, such as identification and demarcation of the land are involved; therefore, the appellants were relegated to the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction for appropriate declaration or other forum where the appellants would like to get their dispute resolved.

¶40

Whether the land of the appellants is part of the land

¶41

Patna High Court LPA No.208 of 2015 dt.21-04-2016

¶42

3/3

¶43

acquired or not cannot be decided in the writ proceedings as it will be subject matter of evidence whether the land of the appellants falls within 5.22 acres of land which stands acquired by the State for a public purpose.

¶44

The stand of the Patna Regional Development Authority is that the land of the appellants is part of the acquisition, therefore, the question whether the land of the appellants was subject matter of acquisition or not is an issue which cannot be decided in writ proceedings, but requires to be adjudicated upon by a Court of fact.

¶45

In view thereof, we do not find any illegality in the order passed by the learned Single Bench which may warrant interference in the present Letters Patent Appeal.

¶46

The Letters Patent Appeal thus stands dismissed.

¶47

(Hemant Gupta, J.)

¶48

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

¶49

Sunil/-

¶50

AFR/NAFR	N.A.F.R.
CAVDATE	N.A.
UploadingDate
Transmission Date

Puja Verma and Anr. v. The Patna Regional Development Authority Through Its Chairman and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Puja Verma and Anr. v. The Patna Regional Development Authority Through Its Chairman 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

Sangeeta Kumari and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Sohan Chaudhary @ Sohan Choudhary Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ratnesh Kumar Mishra and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Bund Lal Paswan and Ors. Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Tribhuwan Jha Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Jamadar Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.