The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 2353 of 2017 ----- Tara Devi Jain, W/o Sri Gyan Chand Jain Versus .... Petitioner(s). 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Commissioner, North Chotanagpur Zone, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 3.Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 4.Sub Divisional Officer cum Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Hazaribagh, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 5.Circle Officer, Hazaribagh, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 6.Swarup Chatterjee, S/o Late Sanat Chatterjee, Resident of Mohall Zulu Park, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 7.Aditya Kumar Mehta, S/o Bhekhlal Mehta, Resident of Village- Kurha, P.O. & P.S. Ichak, District- Hazaribagh. 8.Ajay Kumar Mehta, S/o Dineshwar Prasad Mehta, Resident of Village- Barwan, P.O. & P.S. Ichak, District- Hazaribagh. … Respondent(s). WITH W.P.(C) No. 2364 of 2017 ----- Amit Kumar Bhowmik, S/o Late Amulya Kumar Bhowmik .... Petitioner(s). Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Commissioner, North Chotanagpur Zone, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 3.Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 4.Sub Divisional Officer cum Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Hazaribagh, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 5.Circle Officer, Hazaribagh, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 6.Swarup Chatterjee, S/o Late Sanat Chatterjee, Resident of Mohall Zulu Park, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 7.Aditya Kumar Mehta, S/o Bhekhlal Mehta, Resident of Village- Kurha, P.O. & P.S. Ichak, District- Hazaribagh. 8.Ajay Kumar Mehta, S/o Dineshwar Prasad Mehta, Resident of Village- Barwan, P.O. & P.S. Ichak, District- Hazaribagh … Respondent(s). WITH W.P.(C) No. 2543 of 2017 ----- Achintya Shaw, S/o Late Biswanath Shaw Versus .... Petitioner(s). 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Commissioner, North Chotanagpur Zone, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 3.Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 4.Sub Divisional Officer cum Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Sadar, Hazaribagh, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 5.Circle Officer, Hazaribagh, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 6.Swarup Chatterjee, S/o Late Sanat Chatterjee, Resident of Mohall Zulu Park, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 7.Aditya Kumar Mehta, S/o Bhekhlal Mehta, Resident of Village- Kurha, P.O. & P.S. Ichak, District- Hazaribagh. 8.Ajay Kumar Mehta, S/o Dineshwar Prasad Mehta, Resident of Village- Barwan, P.O. & P.S. Ichak, District- Hazaribagh … Respondent(s). -2- WITH W.P.(C) No. 2563 of 2017 ----- Archana Musib, W/o Dilip Musib .... Petitioner(s). Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Commissioner, North Chotanagpur Zone, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 3.Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 4.Sub Divisional Officer cum Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Hazaribagh, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 5.Circle Officer, Hazaribagh, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 6.Swarup Chatterjee, S/o Late Sanat Chatterjee, Resident of Mohall Zulu Park, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Hazaribagh 7.Aditya Kumar Mehta, S/o Bhekhlal Mehta, Resident of Village- Kurha, P.O. & P.S. Ichak, District- Hazaribagh. 8.Ajay Kumar Mehta, S/o Dineshwar Prasad Mehta, Resident of Village- Barwan, P.O. & P.S. Ichak, District- Hazaribagh … Respondent(s). CORAM :
Legal Reasoning
SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) For the Resp-State ------ : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate Mrs. Puja Agarwal, Advocate : Mr. Nil Abhijit Toppo, AC to G.A.-V Mr. Amitesh Kumar Geasen, AC to AAG-IA Mr. Praveen Akhauri, SC (Mines)-I …...... 05/03.01.2024: In these writ petitions the petitioners have challenged the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh in Rent Assessment Appeal No.19 of 2012, whereby the appeal filed by Swarup Chatterjee challenging the order dated 14.08.2010 passed in Rent Assessment Case No.1 of 2009-10 was set aside and consequently the appeal was allowed with a direction to the Circle Officer to assess the rent and realize the same from the legal heirs of Purnendu Nath Tagore, S/o Raja Prafull Nath Tagore mentioned therein. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Purnendu Nath Tagore or their predecessor in interest has got no right title over the property in question as the land originally belongs to one James Cambell. After his death, his wife Katherine Hanna Leishman Cambell by virtue of will sold the same to Cally Kissen Tagore. After the death of Cally Kissen Tagore the property devolved upon his grandson namely, Raja Prafull Nath Tagore as -3- his son already predecessor him. The said Raja Prafull Nath Tagore died on 02.07.1938 leaving behind a will dated 14.03.1927. The probate was granted. The Testamentary Suit No.12 of 1938 was filed before the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal. By virtue of order dated 08.04.1948 read with 10.05.1948 the name of son of Raja Prafull Nath Tagore was removed from the office of the executors and Administrator General was appointed as the administrator of the estate. Vide order dated 05.09.1950, the Administrator General was authorized to sell the property of deceased, Raja Prafull Nath Tagore. 3. It is the case of the petitioners that their predecessor in interest purchased the land, which was sold by the Administrator. After this property was transferred to the petitioners either by sale or gift. 4. 5. The private-respondents claim their land through the Tagore family. Swarup Chatterjee who is the principal of respondent Nos.7 and 8, claiming the land from Tagore family has filed an application for fixation of rent. The said case was numbered as Rent Assessment Case No. 1 of 2009- 2010. The Sub-Divisional Officer-cum- Land Reforms Deputy Collector Sadar at Hazaribagh vide order dated 14.08.2010 rejected the application of the petitioner holding that the said Swarup Chatterjee is not in a possession of the land in question. Challenging the said order, Swarup Chatterjee filed an appeal being Rent Assessment Case No.19 of 2012 in the Court of the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh. By final order dated 28.05.2013 the said appeal was allowed and it was directed to realize the rent from Sumita Tagore, Ratna Chatterjee, Champa Haldhar and Malti Chatterjee in relation to 8.75 and ‰ acres of land. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners argues that the land in question is enjoyed by the petitioners and they are paying rent as their names have already been recorded in Register-II. He submits that by passing the impugned order the Deputy Commissioner has not considered that the issue in question relates to complicated question of title of the parties. When there is serious dispute in relation to right and title and interest, the matter should -4- have been adjudicated and decided by the Civil Court. Ignoring the issue in dispute, which in fact is a dispute in relation to title of the property, the appellate authority has directed to collect the rent from Sumita Tagore, Ratna Chatterjee, Champa Haldhar and Malti Chatterjee. 7. Mr. Manjul Prasad, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents admits that the issue which is involved in this case, requires adjudication by the Civil Court as there is a serious dispute in relation to the right, title and interest over the land in question. He submits that the petitioners are also claiming the right, title and possession over the land in question and the respondents are also claiming right, title and interest through a will, which was executed way back in the year 1927 and which was also the subject matter of Testamentary Suit No.12 of 1938 before the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal. 8. After hearing the parties, I find that both the parties are claiming title over the land. The petitioners are claiming title through sale deed, which was executed by the petitioners’ predecessor in interest having link with the Testamentary Suit decided by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal. The respondents are also claiming the title over the property through the will, which was executed by Raja Prafull Nath Tagore sometime in the year, 1927, which was also subject matter of Testamentary Suit No.12 of 1938. 9. Thus, there is a serious dispute of title involved in this case. The Appellate Authority thus could not have dealt with the same, rather the same should have been referred to the Civil Court having jurisdiction to decide title. 10. Thus, I set aside the order dated 28.05.2013 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh in Rent Assessment Appeal No.19 of 2012 and also the order passed by the S.D.O.-cum-Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Sadar Hazaribagh in Rend Assessment Case No.1 of 2009-10 whereby it has been directed to collect the rent from Sumita Tagore, Ratna Chatterjee, Champa Haldhar and Malti Chatterjee. -5- 11. Since both the parties are claiming their individual right, title interest and possession over the land in question, both the parties are directed to approach the Civil Court to declare their individual right, title and possession, which will be decided by the Civil Court in accordance with law. 12. Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of with the above direction and observation.
Decision
13. All pending Interlocutory Applications stand disposed of. sharma/RS./ (ANANDA SEN, J.)