Patna High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2286 of 2013 ====================================================== 1. Rama Shankar Singh S/O Late Jagat Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.S. Bagha, District West Champaran. 2. Vijay Bahadur Singh S/O Rama Shankar Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.S. Bagha, District West Champaran. 3. Vinay Bahadur Singh S/O Rama Shankar Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.S. Bagha, District West Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. Ram Naresh Singh S/O Late Lallan Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 2. Kashi Naresh Singh S/O Late Lallan Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 3. Awadh Naresh Singh S/O Late Lallan Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 4. Kaushal Naresh Singh S/O Late Lallan Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 5. Shanti Singh W/O Shri Chandra Ketu Singh Resident Of Village Sandi Buzzura, P.O. Sindhuwa, District Kushi Nagar (U.P.). 6. Shakuntala Singh W/O Sri Awadhesh Singh At Mohalla Bilandpur, P.O. & District Gorakhpur (U.P.). 7. Pushpa Singh W/O Sri Arvind Shahi At Mohalla Shivpur, P.O. & P.S. Gorakhpur, District Gorakhpur (U.P.). 8. Ravi Pratap Singh S/O Yogendra Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 9. Surya Pratap Singh S/O Yogendra Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 10. Bhim Pal S/O Dulal Pal Resident Of Village Gaunaria, P.O. Mithaura, District Maharajganj (U.P.). 11. Damodar Pal S/O Dulal Pal Resident Of Village Gaunaria, P.O. Mithaura, District Maharajganj (U.P.). 12. Bishun Devi W/O Late Shivdhani Shahi Resident Of Village Parwania, P.O. & P.S. Siswa Bazar, District Maharajganj (U.P.). 13. Jashoda Devi W/O Thakur Singh Resident At P.O. + P.S. Siswa Bazar, District Maharajganj (U.P.). 14. Bijay Kumari Devi @ Jagdamba Devi D/O Palakdhari Singh W/O Bhagwan Singh At Kanauli, P.O. Kanauli, P.S. Rudrapur, District Deoria (U.P.). 15. Guddi Kumari D/O Palakdhari Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 16. Ram Pratap Singh S/O Late Palakdhari Singh @ Pandit Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 17. Rudra Pratap Singh S/O Late Ganesh Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 18. Ranvir Singh @ Ekbal Ji Singh S/O Late Harihar Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 19. Randhir Singh @ Gopal Ji Singh S/O Late Harihar Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 20. Niranjan Singh S/O Late Jamindra Singh Resident Of Village 2 Patna High Court CWJC No.2286 of 2013 (5) dt.19-03-2013 2 / 7 Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 21. Rajeshwar Singh S/O Late Jamindra Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 22. Mosmat Sulochana Devi W/O Late Pashupati Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 23. Ashok Kumar Singh S/O Late Pashupati Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 24. Manoj Kumar Sah S/O Late Pashupati Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 25. Sudhir Kumar Singh S/O Late Pashupati Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 26. Asha Devi W/O Sri Mrigendra Singh Resident Of Village Pirahni, P.O. + P.S. Barhalganj, District Gorakhpur (U.P.). 27. Manorma Chand W/O Dinesh Chand Resident Of Bhitti, P.O. Dhakwa Bazar, P.S. Shikarganj, District Gorakhpur (U.P.). 28. Birendra Pathak S/O Late Rudra Narain Pathak Resident Of Gudari Bazar, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 29. Umesh Pathak S/O Late Rudra Narain Pathak Resident Of Gudari Bazar, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 30. Umesh Singh S/O Late Sobhat Singh Resident Of Village Harpur, P.O. Harpur, P.S. Pipiganj, District Gorakhpur (U.P.) 31. Suresh Singh S/O Late Sobhat Singh Resident Of Village Harpur, P.O. Harpur, P.S. Pipiganj, District Gorakhpur (U.P.) 32. Kishor Chaudhari S/O Baliraj Chaudhari Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 33. Manager Sah S/O Late Harihar Sah Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 34. Lalti Devi D/O Late Parmeshwar Ram Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 35. Paras Singh S/O Jangi Singh Resident Of Village Bishwas, P.O. Turhapatti, P.S. Chanpatia, District West Champaran. 36. Krishna Kumari D/O Rajendra Singh At Present Residing At Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 37. Banarasi Devi W/O Rudra Pratap Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 38. Sumitra Devi D/O Rudra Pratap Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 39. Pramila Devi S/O Rudra Pratap Singh Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 40. Ramadhar Chaudhari S/O Chhedi Chaudhari Resident Of Village Bagaha, P.O. + P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 41. Krishna Mohan Sinha S/O Late Muneshwar Sinha Resident Of Village Naraipur, P.O. Naraipur, P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. 42. Madanji Sinha S/O Late Muneshwar Sinha Resident Of Village Naraipur, P.O. Naraipur, P.S. Bagaha, District West Champaran. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Faiz Ahmad For the Respondent/s : Mr. ====================================================== 3 Patna High Court CWJC No.2286 of 2013 (5) dt.19-03-2013 3 / 7
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SHEEMA ALI KHAN ORAL ORDER 5 19-03-2013 Heard Counsel for the petitioners and the respondents. This writ application arises out of the order dated 16.11.2012 by which the petitioners have challenged the order of the Pleader Commissioner on the ground that it is in the teeth of the orders of the High Court. A suit was filed in the year 1974. The plaintiffs and the defendants 1st set filed a compromise in the said suit, which was allowed, however the suit was dismissed as far as the defendants 2nd set was concerned. The plaintiff thereafter filed F.A. No. 838 of 1978. On 12.12.1989, the petitioner purchased 2 kathas 8 dhurs of land of plot no. 1696 from defendant 1st set in the suit. In the first appeal, the compromise decree was modified and lands were allotted to the plaintiffs and the defendants as per the compromise. While disposing of the first appeal, the judgment dated 14th November, 2000 would disclosed as follows:- “Hence, this appeal is disposed of in terms of compromise as against defendants-respondents first party and I.A. No. 1669 of 2000 is made part of the decree. It is made clear 4 Patna High Court CWJC No.2286 of 2013 (5) dt.19-03-2013 4 / 7 that right, title, interest and possession of aforesaid purchasers in respect of 2 kathas 8 dhurs land of plot no. 1696 is not affected in any manner and this appeal is dismissed as against defendants-respondents 9 to 11. However, there will be no order as to costs. Thus, it would appear that the right, interest and title of the petitioners before this Court was protected by this High Court and it is declared that they have a right over 2 kathas 8 dhurs of land of plot no. 1696, which right would not be affected in any manner. Later, this matter also traveled to this Court when the order dated 29.07.2008 passed in Final Decree 2 of 2003 by Sub Judge I, Bagaha, West Champaran was challenged by the respondents. At that stage, the Court came to the conclusion that they would not interfere with the impugned order. This Court, while disposing of the civil revision, maintained the earlier order passed in the first appeal and concluded that the dispute between the parties was settled by the judgment of this Court in the first appeal and as such, the decree and the findings are binding upon the parties. It has been observed by the Court that there is no ambiguity in the directions of the High Court and the Court will have to keep in mind that while preparing the final decree, there was specific directions 5 Patna High Court CWJC No.2286 of 2013 (5) dt.19-03-2013 5 / 7 with regard to purchase of 2 kathas 8 dhurs of land of plot no. 1696 by the petitioners. The Court held that there is no impediment in preparation of the final decree. After this Court had settled the issues, vis-à-vis title, right and interest of the petitioners with regard to 2 kathas 8 dhurs over plot no. 1696, little is required to be settled. No Court can now sit in review the orders passed by the High Court. Subsequently, the Pleader Commissioner was appointed by the Sub Judge I, Bagaha West Champaran. The Pleader Commissioner has reported that the contesting respondents have pucca house, bathrooms, small construction for storing water over plot no. 1696. The Pleader Commissioner has also reported that the right of way of the contesting respondents would be affected if the land is allotted to the petitioners. It has also been held by the Court that the petitioners had purchased a litigation and they have no right to make any claim. Once, the High Court has held that the petitioners’ interest would be protected, I do not think that the lower Court could have held otherwise and, therefore, this part of the order is absolutely in the teeth of the orders of this Court! Arguments have been raised on behalf of the respondents-plaintiffs in this case that the sale deed of the 6 Patna High Court CWJC No.2286 of 2013 (5) dt.19-03-2013 6 / 7 petitioners indicates that they had purchased 2 kaths 8 dhurs by three registered sale deeds, thereby submitting that in fact the lands purchased by the petitioners was not a compact plot of land. On the other hand, Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the Court may look into the sale deeds, the boundaries in the sale deeds and after looking into the boundaries, it would be clear that the lands was in a compact block. It is also submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the so- called PAGDANDI, which is mentioned in the sale deed is very much there at the spot which has not been taken into consideration by the Pleader Commissioner. The Trial Court accepted the report of the Pleader Commissioner by the impugned order, rejecting the objections raised on behalf of the petitioners. As indicated above, it would appear that the Pleader Commissioner has gone beyond the orders of the Court, has not made a correct statement of the actual facts as per the sale deeds. The plea raised by the respondents was never raised at any stage of the case. It can well be believed that the respondents during the pendency of the case have tried to create impediments by making construction and encroachment on the PAGDANDI. Infact, it is argued on behalf of the petitioner that 7 Patna High Court CWJC No.2286 of 2013 (5) dt.19-03-2013 7 / 7 the respondents have entry into their plot from the north side. Considering all aspects, I set aside the order dated 16.11.2012 and direct the Court below to determine 2 kathas 8 dhurs as per the sale deeds of the petitioners by appointing another Pleader Commissioner who should measure the lands as per the sale deeds of the petitioners. The measurement should be made in presence of the Circle Officer/Sub Divisional Officer, who will ensure that the order of the High Court is not flouted by the Pleader Commissioner so appointed by the Court. Under no circumstances, can it be held that the petitioners would not be entitled to 2 kathas 8 dhurs considering that this part of the direction has been affirmed by the High Court, both in the first appeal and in the civil revision.
Decision
In the result, this writ application is allowed. Prabhakar Anand/- (Sheema Ali Khan, J)