Back
2018 Supreme(Jhk) 1991
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.
Chandan Manna & Anr. - Appellant
Versus
State Of Jharkhand & Ors. - Respondent
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 2332 of 2007
Decided On : 01-02-2018
Akshay Kr Mahato, Adv.
The claim of adverse possession over Government property requires detailed examination and evidence, which cannot be adjudicated in writ proceedings.
Headnote:
Adverse Possession - Property Dispute - Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act - Section 89 of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act,1908 - (2010) 5 SCC 203, 2013 (2) JCR 470(Jhr), 2017 (4) JBCJ 723 (HC)
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought compensation and a direction to restrain interference with their possession over a property claimed through adverse possession. The respondents denied the claim of adverse possession and stated that the property belonged to the Government. The court found that the petitioners had encroached on Government land and dismissed the petition, noting that the claim of adverse possession required detailed examination and that the petitioners had not disputed the issuance of a general notice for eviction.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the petition, stating that the claim of adverse possession required detailed examination and that the petitioners had not disputed the issuance of a general notice for eviction.
Issues: Claim of adverse possession, encroachment on Government land, issuance of general notice for eviction
Ratio Decidendi: The claim of adverse possession over Government property requires detailed examination and evidence, which cannot be adjudicated in writ proceedings. The petitioners' awareness of the general notice for eviction, as stated by the respondents, was not disputed by the petitioners.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, but the court clarified that the dismissal would not prejudice the petitioners' case if they chose to seek a declaration of their right, title, and interest over the property from a competent civil court.
JUDGMENT
Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J. - Heard Mr. Saibal Mitra, counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners.
2. Heard J.C. to Sr. S.C. II counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.
3. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners for the following reliefs:-
(i) For a direction commanding upon the respondent Nos. 1 to 5 to pay compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- for the alleged illegal demolition of the half portion of the house and garage of the petitioners situated at Khata No. 3, Plot No. 693/1 measuring an area about 0.01.21 hectares about 1 Katha 16 dhur, under Ward No. 4, J.N.A.C. Jamshedpur which is said to have been demolished by the respondent Nos. 3 to 5 without initiating any proceeding under the provisions of Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act or any other Eviction Proceeding.
(ii) For a direction restraining the respondents from interfering with the possession of the petitioners over the aforesaid land claiming that the petitioners have been residing on the said land since 1957 and running his Motor Repairing Shop without any interference of anybody within the knowledge of the respondents and that the petitioners perfected their right, title and interest over the aforesaid land by way of adverse possession as they are in continuous physical possession since 1957.
(iii) For a direction upon the respondent No. 2 to take legal action against respondent Nos. 3 to 5 for the aforesaid demolition of the house and garage of the petitioners.
4. The counsel for the petitioners submit as under:-
a. The aforesaid property falls within the Tata lease area and the petitioners claim to be in peaceful possession of the property since the year 1957 in which they are running the motor garage shop and are having one room house.
b. In order to establish that they are in possession of the property since 1957, the petitioners have relied upon the license dated 23.01.1957, granted by the authorities under Bihar Shops and Establishment Act, from perusal of which it appears that it was renewed from time to time.
c. The petitioners have relied upon the order under Section 89 of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act,1908 in case No. 104/1988-89 between the deceased father of the petitioner namely Ganesh Chandra Manna and M/s TISCO Ltd. with respect to the said land and submitted that the Assistant Settlement Officer Jamshedpur vide order dated 24.01.1989 was pleased to record the name of the deceased father Ganesh Chandra Manna in the record of rights and declared the possession of the deceased father of the petitioners since the year 1975.
d. On the basis of these documents, the petitioners claim adverse possession of the property since 1975 and submit that 30 years already elapsed in the month of March 2005 and they have perfected the title over the property by way of adverse possession.
e. The petitioners claim that their possession was peaceful possession of the property till March 2007.
f. At paragraph No. 10 of the writ petition, specific averment has been made by the petitioners that without any prior notice and without any proceeding for eviction, the respondent Nos. 3 to 5 demolished half portion of the constructed area, i.e. his house-cum-motor garage.
g. On 10.04.2007, the respondent Nos. 3 to 5 further threatened that rest of the portion will also be demolished shortly.
h. The petitioners suffered loss to the tune of Rs. 2,00,000/- on account of illegal demolition of their property.
i. By referring to counter-affidavit, the counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondents have mentioned about publication of general notice in local newspaper with regard to alleged encroachment and the specific case of the petitioners is that they were available on the spot, the general notice under the provisions of Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act and rules framed thereunder could not have been issued and it should have been specific notice against that petitioners so as to enable them to put forth their case before the authorities.
