Disposed

Mahendar Singh and Ors. v. Ballu Singh and Anr.

Uttarakhand HC24 Jul 2017WPMS/448/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court held that when regular title declaration proceedings under Section 229B are pending, summary eviction under Section 54 of the Land Revenue Act cannot proceed. The petitioner is directed to file an application under Section 229D for a stay, maintaining status quo until the regular suit is decided without prejudice to future findings.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to file an application under Section 229D to restrain eviction and maintenance of status quo.

Mahendar Singh and Ors. Vs Ballu Singh and Anr. — Land Acquisition | Uttarakhand HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶2

Writ Petition (M/S) No. 448 of 2006

¶3

Mahendar Singh and Others

¶4

...….……Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

Ballu Singh and another ……. Respondents

¶7

Present: Mr. Mahavir Singh Tyagi, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Chandra Mauli Shah, Advocate for the respondents

¶8

Hon’ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)

¶9

The issue which is raised by the petitioner is lying within very limited campus. His simple contention is that proceedings drawn under Section 54 of the Land Revenue Act in relation to the Gata No. 589 Ka which was initiated on the basis of reports submitted by Naib Tehsildar is bad. From the limited view point that since this land stands recorded in Shreni No. 1 in the Khatauni of Gadarpur, District U.S. Nagar in khata no. 1 hence he could not have been evicted under sub Section (7) of Section 54 of the Land Revenue Act and this order happens to be without competence.

¶10

The case of the petitioner is that the eviction contemplated under Section 54 is only in relation to the land which is being held and occupied by a person unauthorisedly and the land belongs to a state or a local body. The fact which has come on record is that the petitioner for the determination of his rights had already instituted a suit for declaration under Section 229-B in relation to the gata no. 20M, presently gata no. 589 ka to which this writ petition is related to. However those proceedings under Section 229B being a regular proceedings

¶11

¶12

will be having an overriding effect over the proceedings under Section 54 which are summary in view of Section 40-A of the Land Revenue Act. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is pursuing his remedy by way of Suit No. 22/06 of 1995-96 under 229B may it be at any stage.

¶13

If the said suit is pending which involves a declaration of right he cannot be evicted under the garb of the summary proceedings under Section 54 of the Land Revenue Act, hence he contends that the order directing eviction is without competence.

¶14

In the light of the above, this Court feels that once the regular proceedings for declaration of right has already been initiated by the petitioner under Section 229B, in relation to gata no. 589 ka only, in all fitness of things the impugned order could be interfered to that limited extent that the eviction order could not have been passed by the authorities and when there were conscious of the fact that regular proceedings under Section 229B is already in existence and pending.

¶15

The inception of the proceedings based on the report of the Naib Tehsildar, which has culminated upto the stage of Section 219 of the Land Revenue Act. Since is not an adjudication of his title will have no bearing on his rights in relation to gata no. 589 ka. This Court feels further that if in response to the impugned order, which affected his rights it would be prejudicing in the suit for declaration. Hence the writ petition is disposed of with the direction that the petitioner will

¶16

¶17

filed an application under Section 229D in the proceedings under Section 229B for seeking a restrain from eviction in pursuance to summary order impugned in this writ petition. The orders passed which are challenged here will not create an embargo to the Assistant Collector in considering the application of the petitioner under Section 229D independently without being influenced by any of the findings recorded by the Revenue Authority under the Land Revenue Act.

¶18

Till 229-B is decided status quo qua the nature and title of the property lying in gata no. 589 ka would be maintained by the petitioner.

¶19

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) 24.07.2017

¶20

Mahinder/

Mahendar Singh and Ors. v. Ballu Singh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahendar Singh and Ors. v. Ballu Singh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sabiha Mahmood Vs Civil Judge j.d. and Ors.

Narain Dutt Joshi Vs P.O.L.C. and Anr.

State and Ors. Vs Surendra Singh and Anr.

Molhad Singh Vs D.d.c and Ors.

Mohabbat Singh Vs Addl. Chief Revenue Commissioner and Ors.

Hanif and Ors. Vs State and Anr.