High Court dismissed writ petition seeking land regularization and patta issuance, holding petitioner must exhaust civil remedy and cannot indirectly pursue claims barred by prior compromise decree in civil suit.
No patta or regularization granted; petition 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.
SB CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3917/2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
O R D E R
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3917/ 2010
KANA RAM & ORS. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.
DATE:17.01.2014
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI
Mr. A.L. Verma, for the petitioners. ****
This petition has been filed to seek a direction for regularization of the possession and issuance of the Patta for a land measuring 770 sq. yards.
The reply to writ petition shows that the petitioner earlier
preferred a civil suit to seek injunction. The application for temporary injunction was rejected. The petitioner preferred appeal thereupon and in the appeal, the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Sambhar Lake, District Jaipur, vide order dated 15.07.1996, recorded the fact of compromise between the parties. The petitioner was to be given Plot No.66 in Joshi Colony, Phulera. He was directed to handover the land occupied by him. It was further made clear that if the petitioner failed to handover the possession of the extra land, the Municipal Board shall be free to remove the encroachment.
In view of above, now a new opening cannot be given to the
petitioner to agitate the same issue here. If at all, he was aggrieved by
{2} SB CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3917/2010
the order of the Appellate Court, could have challenged it further. What he could not get in the civil suit directly, cannot be claimed here indirectly. The direction for allotment and issuance of Patta cannot be given now after the decision of the Appellate Court and otherwise a writ under Article 226 is not maintainable for the purpose.
In view of above, the writ petition is dismissed. (M.N. BHANDARI),J.
/ KKC/ Certificate:
All corrections made in the judgment/ order have been incorporated in the judgment/ order being emailed. KAMLESH KUMAR P.A.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition for regularization of land possession maintainable when civil compromise decree already exists?
Whether extra land acquired via compromise can be reclaimed indirectly through writ?
KANA RAM & ORS.
STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.
M.N. BHANDARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
