Petitioner sought direction to prevent mutation of disputed land in favor of Chandra Kant Thakur, who purchased it via registered sale deed from the person in whose name the land stood in the revisional survey. The Court held the petitioner failed to seek correction of the record and dismissed the petition.
Petitioner's writ petition 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.25498 of 2019
======================================================
Raj Nandan Singh S/o -Late Ram Kaval Singh R/o- Village and P.O.- Dih Dhandhua, Dist.- Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr.Subash Chandra Yadav (GP15)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER
2 19-12-2019 Heard both sides.
The petitioner filed this writ petition for a direction to
the Circle Officer, Jandaha, respondent No.4, not to mutate the land of Revisional Survey Khata No. 706, Plot No. 466, Thana No. 364, Area 5.625 decimal situated in village- Dhandhua, Block- Jandaha, District- Vaishali in the name of Chandra Kant Thakur, S/o Kamala Kant Thakur R/O village- Dhandhua, P.S.Jandaha District- Vaishali, who has purchased the aforesaid land by registered sale deed from Maha Purush Singh.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that land of Plot No. 466, Thana No. 364, Area 5.625 decimal was wrongly recorded in the name of Ram Khelawan Singh in the
Patna High Court CWJC No.25498 of 2019(2) dt.19-12-2019 2/2
revisional survey. The land was recorded in the name of forefather of petitioner in cadestral survey. The petitioner is in possession of the land but Maha Purush Singh illegally sold the land in favour of Chandra Kant Thakur on 16.04.2019. The petitioner filed petition before the Circle Officer but from the facts it appears that in the revisional survey the land was recorded in the name of ancestor of Maha Purush Singh. The petitioner did not take any step for correction of record of rights. Maha Purush Singh, in whose name the land was recorded in the revisional survey, sold the land in favour of Chandra Kant Thakur and Chandra Kant Thakur is entitled to get his name mutated by virtue of sale deed and, therefore, this court cannot direct the Circle Officer not to mutate the name of Chandra Kant Thakur.
Having considers the facts aforesaid, I do not find any merit in this writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)
BKS/-
U
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Court can direct the Circle Officer not to mutate the land in the name of the purchaser under a registered sale deed.
Whether the petitioner needed to seek correction of the record of rights before challenging the mutation.
Raj Nandan Singh
The State of Bihar Through the Principal Secretary Revenue Dept.
The District Magistrate Vaishali
The Sub- Divisional Officer Mahua
The Circle Officer Jandaha
Prabhat Kumar Jha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
