Uday Kumar Ram v. The State Of Bihar & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
application is disposed of
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 88. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this application is disposed of. Sunnykr/- U (Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Judgment
Sri Umesh Ram son of Late Baleshwar Ram Rajkumar Ram son of Late Bhagwat Ram both resident of Village P.O. P.S.- Mahishi, District- Saharsa. ... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s For the State ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN Mr.Diwakar Prasad Singh, Adv None : : 3 25-09-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. However, ORAL ORDER counsel for the State is not present.
The present writ petition has been filed for directing the District Magistrate, Saharsa to get the forged Parcha appertaining to Khata No. 2786 Plot No. 9093 area 07 Decimal cancelled which is alleged to be issued in the year 1964-65 and rent receipt were issued on the basis of same Parcha in the year 2003 whereas the said land belongs to the petitioner as it is his Raiyati land.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the private respondents, in connivance with the staff of the Circle Officer have obtained rent receipt and by virtue of it, they are creating disturbance to the petitioner. According to them, they are Parcha holder under The Bihar Privileged Persons Homestead Patna High Court CWJC No.18775 of 2015(3) dt.25-09-2023 Tenancy Act, 1947 (Bihar Act IV of 1948), (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1948').
4. It has further been submitted by the counsel that no such proceeding under the Act of 1948 has been initiated which can be verified from the records.
After going through the pleadings and the records of this case, it transpires that this dispute is covered under Section 40(a) of the Act of 1948 in which the power is vested to the Collector of District to call for and examine the records.
In that background, petitioner is directed to file his application before the Collector, Saharsa to file application under Section 21 of the Act of 1948.
Upon receiving the application, the Collector, Saharsa is directed to do all the needful as laid down under Section 21 of the Act of 1948 within 60 days from the date of appearance of all the parties and receipt of the records from the lower/subordinate office.
Operative part
With the aforesaid observation and direction, this application is disposed of. Sunnykr/- U (Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: application is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Tenancy Act, 1947.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.