SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(Jhk) 1613

D.N.PATEL
Mahendra Vishwakarma – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Sanjay Prasad.
For1he Respondent(s): J.C. to S.C. (L&C)

Order

Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that the order passed by the Certificate Officer, Baghmara, Distt. Dhanbad, has unnecessarily interfered with the title of the present petitioner upon the property, in question, especially, when the title suit filed by Respondent No.5 being Title Suit No. 58 of 2008, is pending before the Sub Judge-I, Dhanbad. Even injunction application preferred under Order 39, Rules 1 & 2 of Code of Civil Procedure is pending before the trial court and has not yet been decided in favour of Respondent No.5, who is plaintiff in Titie Suit No. 15 of 2008. Thus, the Circle Officer, Baghmara, District-Dhanbad, who has granted permission of construction upon the suit property is nothing, but, an interference with the justice delivery system. Revenue Officer has no power, jurisdiction and authority to decide title of the property, in question.

2. It is also vehemently submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is the owner of the property and permission of construction has been given to Respondent No. 5 by the Circle Officer, Baghmara, District-Dhanbad vide order dated 4th of January, 2008, Annexure-7 to the memo of p












Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top