In this writ petition, the petitioner sought compensation for the demolition of his property, relying on a prior civil decree. The Court held that since the State has preferred an appeal in the underlying title suit, the matter is not appropriate for this Court and dismissed the petition.
The writ petition is not entertained and was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5458 of 2015
======================================================
Drigonmeshwar, aged 48 Yrs, S/O Late Baidya Sitaram resident of Mohalla Harding Road, Kranti Marg, Opp-Haj Bhawan, PS- Sachivalya, PO- GPO, Dist- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Drigonmeshwar (In Person) For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ankit Katriar, A.C. to AAG-13
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 19-09-2018
“That the respondent be commanded to pay compensation of Rs. 80,000,00 (rupees eighty lack) for the illegal, intentional & arbitrary demolition of temples and house of petitioner standing over Plot No 1195 & 1196 which was covered by judgment and Decree of competent
Patna High Court CWJC No.5458 of 2015 dt.19-09-2018 2/3
Civil Court vide order dtd. 26-08-1996 in Title Suit No 36 of 1994 passed by learned Subordinate Judge 1st , Patna.”
and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondentState and considering the material on record, more particularly the counter filed on behalf of the State, it appears that against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Court dated 26.08.1996 passed in Title Suit No. 36 of 1994, the State has preferred Title Appeal No. 18 of 2012. Under the circumstances, unless and until the Title Appeal is decided and disposed of, the petitioner shall not be entitled to any relief as prayed in the present petition. It is required to be noted that in the aforesaid Title Appeal the brother of the petitioner is already a party who filed Title Suit No. 36 of 1994 and upon which the reliance has been placed by the petitioner.
2.1. Even otherwise, there shall be disputed question of fact with regard to compensation/what amount of compensation and for which even otherwise petitioner is to file an appropriate proceeding before the Civil Court. Even in the petition also it is not stated how the petitioner is claiming Rs. 80,00,000/- (eighty lacs) by way of compensation.
Patna High Court CWJC No.5458 of 2015 dt.19-09-2018 3/3
circumstances, for the present the writ petition is not entertained and the same deserves to be dismissed and is, accordingly,
dismissed.
(Mukesh R. Shah, CJ)
(Ashutosh Kumar, J)
P.K.P./-R.S.Sen
AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 20.09.2018 Transmission Date
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition can be entertained when the underlying civil dispute regarding title and compensation is still pending in appeal.
Whether a writ petition claiming specific monetary compensation can be entertained by this Court without a prior filing in a Civil Court.
Drigonmeshwar
State of Bihar
Director General of Police, Bihar
District Magistrate, Patna
Secretary Department of Land Reforms
Secretary Building Construction Department
Chief Justice
Ashutosh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
