Disposed

Tala Moi Marandi v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC20 Feb 2018CWJC/18545/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition regarding a dispute over apportionment of land acquisition compensation. Due to conflicting claims by the wife, alleging to be the first or second spouse, and potential succession issues involving the deceased's daughters, the matter was referred to the appropriate court for adjudication with a stay on payment.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of. Matter referred to the Land Acquisition Court for proper adjudication in terms of Section 30 for apportionment of compensation. No payment to be made in the meantime. Notice

Tala Moi Marandi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Succession and Inheritance | Patna HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18545 of 2014

¶3

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

¶4

Tala Moi Marandi W/O Late Raghu Manjhi Resident of Village-Santhyati Tola, P.S. -Pirpainti, District- Bhagalpur

¶5

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

The District Magistrate, Bhagalpur

¶9

The Land Acquisition Officer, Bhagalpur

¶10

Manjhli Manghian, W/O Durga Yadav, resident of village - Jhamar, P.S. - Pirpainti, District -Bhagalpur.

¶11

The State of Bihar.

¶12

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh For the Respondent No.4: Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary

¶13

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 20-02-2018

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶15

In the present case, the dispute is only with respect to the apportionment or payment of the compensation amount of the land which has been acquired by the State.

¶16

There is no dispute that the land which has been acquired, the revenue record reflects the original land holder is Raghu Manjhi having two wives, namely, Manjhli Manghian and Tala Moi Marandi (petitioner). As per claim of the petitioner, after divorce Manjhli Manghian married with one Durga Yadav and started living with Durga Yadav as wife and husband, after death

¶17

Patna High Court CWJC No.18545 of 2014 dt.20-02-2018

¶18

¶19

of Raghu Manjhi now Manjhli Manghian respondent no.4 is claiming to be the first wife of Raghu Manjhi.

¶20

Learned counsel for respondent no.4 submits that story that has been narrated in the writ petition is completely incorrect. Althrough Manjhli Manghian was living with her husband and present petitioner is second wife of Raghu Manjhi and as such respondent no.4 is entitled to the compensation amount as present petitioner entered into the marriage illegally.

¶21

The State has filed its counter affidavit in which it has been stated that award no. 141 of Mauza Harinkol Part II was prepared in favour of Manik Hembrom and Hemlata Hembrom, both are daughters of late Raghu Manjhi and accordingly notice under section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act for payment of 80% of compensation amount to Rs. 2,70,60,559.68 is meant for distribution to the heirs.

¶22

Now it appears that there is dispute of apportionment as award has been prepared in favour of the daughters of late Raghu Manjhi and present petitioner and respondent no.4 are also claiming the share over the award amount.

¶23

In such view of the matter, in terms of Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, the matter be referred to the Land Acquisition Court for proper adjudication in the matter and in the

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.18545 of 2014 dt.20-02-2018

¶25

¶26

meantime no payment should be made to any person. While deciding the issue of apportionment the Land Acquisition Court will give notice to all interested parties including Manik Hembrom and Hemlata Hembrom as having been claimed in the counter affidavit that award has been prepared in their favour and payment will be made as per the apportionment decided by the Land Acquisition Court.

¶27

With the aforesaid observation and direction this writ petition is disposed of.

¶28

(Shivaji Pandey, J)

¶29

Vinay/-

¶30

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
UploadingDate	24.2.2018
Transmission Date	NA

Tala Moi Marandi v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tala Moi Marandi 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak Kumar Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Ram Sewak Choudhary Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Awadh Kishore Singh and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Hardeep Raj Singh Vs the Union of India and Ors.

Babulal Mandal and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Jagdish Yadav Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.