Dismissing the writ petition, the Court held that the matter involves a disputed question of fact between private individuals. The Court refused to interfere and granted liberty to pursue legal remedies.
Writ application dismissed with liberty to pursue available legal remedy.
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 Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.33 of 2017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2016 Thana- NAYA RAM NAGAR District- Munger
======================================================
Mahesh Kumar, Son of Late Meeta Ram Yadav, Resident of Village - Janki Nagar, P.S. - Naya Ramnagar, District- Munger.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhirendra Nath Jha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Md. Nashrul Hoda Khan SC1
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 10-01-2020
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Staterespondents.
The petitioner has sought for a writ of mandamus directing the State and State-authorities, who are respondents herein, to unlock the five shops which were illegally locked by the accused persons of Naya Ramnagar P.S. Case No. 95 of 2016.
Petitioner claims that he had purchased Plot No. 1476 under Khata No. 184, Area 45 Decimals along with bamboo clamp and a house in a dilapidated condition through registered sale deed dated
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.33 of 2017 dt.10-01-2020 2/2
05.11.1986 from one Hirdu Mal. Thereafter, the petitioner made a construction thereon including the referred five shops. Mutation of the name of the petitioners in respect of the aforesaid land was challenged by one Nardi Yadav in Mutation Appeal No. 11/87-88 before the D.C.L.R., Munger and appeal was dismissed and the dismissal was confirmed by the next appellate court. Thereafter, Nardi Yadav and his brother Fuleshwar Yadav and Nageshwar Yadav started disturbing the possession of the petitioner over the said land which led to a proceeding under Section 145 Cr.P.C. vide Case No. 902M of 1987 before the S.D.O., Munger. The S.D.O., Munger passed order in favour of the petitioner. The accused persons, of Naya Ramnagar P.S. Case No. 95 of 2016, are either son of Late Nardi Yadav or associates of the son of Late Nardi Yadav.
Apparently, the matter appears to be a disputed question of fact between two private individuals, hence, the writ court cannot interfere in the matter.
Accordingly, this application stands dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to pursue the available legal remedy.
(Birendra Kumar, J)
Kundan/-
| AFR/NAFR | N.A. |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | N.A. |
| Uploading Date | 15.01.2020 |
| Transmission Date | 15.01.2020 |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ court can interfere in a disputed question of fact between two private individuals regarding possession of land.
Whether the High Court is empowered to direct unlocking of shops locked by private parties in a property dispute.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mahesh Kumar
The State of Bihar through Director General of Police
The District Magistrate, Munger
The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Munger
The Superintendent of Police, Munger
The Dy. Superintendent of Police, Munger
BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
