Disposed

Darshan Singh v. State and Ors.

Rajasthan HC7 Feb 2022CW/1247/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition claiming a refund of ₹50,000 with interest. Relying on a prior identical judgment, the court directed the petitioner to submit a fresh affidavit within four weeks specifying the possession handover date before the Sub Divisional Officer. Thereafter, the respondent must refund the amount with 12% interest within three months of receiving the affidavit.

What did the court decide?

Direction to petitioner to submit affidavit within four weeks specifying possession handover date; respondents to refund amount with 12% interest within three months of affidavit receipt.

Darshan Singh Vs State and Ors. — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

(1 of 3)

¶2

[CW-1247/2014]

¶3

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶4

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1247/2014

Darshan Singh

----Petitioner

Versus

State And Ors

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. JL Purohit Sr. Advocate a/w Mr. Rajeev Purohit on VC For Respondent(s) : Mr. DK Joshi, AGC on VC

¶11

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶12

Order

¶13

07/02/2022

¶14

In wake of instant surge in COVID-19 cases and spread of its highly infectious Omicron variant, lawyers have been advised to refrain from coming to the Courts.

¶15

The petitioner has preferred the writ petition claiming the following relief:-

¶16

“(i) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to refund Rs.50,000/- as per direction of the High Court (Annex-1) alongwith interest @ 12% per annum. (ii) Any other appropriate writ or direction necessary for justice be issued.”

¶17

At the outset, learned Additional Government Counsel Mr. Dinesh Joshi submits that the respondents are prepared to return back the money of the petitioner, from the date when he has returned the possession of the land in question.

¶18

(2 of 3)

¶19

[CW-1247/2014]

¶20

Learned counsel for the parties jointly submit that the order passed by this Court in Jagdev Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (in SBCWP No.4836/2014) decided on 14.07.2017, is applicable in the present case, which reads as follows:-

¶21

“Both the above mentioned writ petitions shall stand disposed of by this common order.

¶22

For convenience, facts are taken from S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4836/2014.

¶23

The only prayer in the present petition is to direct the respondents to refund Rs.24,250/- along with interest @ 12% per annum as per the direction of this Court vide order dated 20.05.1993 passed in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2845/1992 (Jagraj Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.)

¶24

Learned counsel for the respondents states that they have no objection in giving the said amount to the petitioner in case he files an affidavit to the effect that he has handed over the possession of the land in question to the State.

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that this fact has already been mentioned by them in the written statement. Learned counsel for the petitioners has pointed out that the petitioner was asked to file an application before the Sub Divisional Officer on 25.06.2012 along with an affidavit that he has handed over the possession. Thereafter, the Sub Divisional Officer sent the application tot he Tehsildar and Patwari for enquiry and report. The Patwari submitted his report on 10.07.2012 and is already placed on record as Annexure-4. As per the report of the Patwari, the petitioner Jagdev Singh has vacated the possession but in spite of the same the amount is not refunded.

¶26

Reply has been filed in the present case.

¶27

(3 of 3)

¶28

[CW-1247/2014]

¶29

In the said reply, there is no specific denial to the report of the Patwari.

¶30

At this stage, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the needful shall be done if the petitioners file a fresh affidavit to the said effect.

¶31

In view of the above, the present petitions are disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to submit a fresh affidavit within two weeks from today before the Sub Divisional Officer, Anoopgarh specifying the date on which the possession was handed over. Thereafter, the respondent authorities shall refund the amount along with 12% interest in terms of the order dated 20.05.1993 passed by the Division Bench of this Court. The refund be made within one month of the receipt of the said affidavit. ”

¶32

In light of the submission made by learned counsel for the respondent as well as the order shown by both the counsels, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to submit fresh affidavit within a period of four weeks from today before the concerned Sub Divisional Officer specifying the date on which the possession was handed over by them. Thereafter, the respondent-authority shall refund the amount alongwith 12% interest in terms of order dated 20.05.1993 passed by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court. The interest shall be leviable from the date when the possession of the land in question has been handed over. The refund shall be made within a period of three months from the receipt of the said affidavit.

¶33

All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly.

¶34

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.

¶35

81-Sudheer/-

Darshan Singh v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Darshan Singh v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dinesh Parmar Vs Smt. Usha Sharma

Dinesh Parmar and Ors. Vs Smt. Usha Sharma and Anr.

M/S. Bapu Marbles Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. and Ors.

Preeti Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Shekhar Adhikary Vs Rajasthan University of Health Science

Raghunath Singh Vs State and Ors.