IMPORTANT POINT
[The court established that disputes regarding land rights, especially those involving allegations of forgery and conflicting claims, must be resolved in civil courts rather than through writ petitions, reinforcing the principle that the writ jurisdiction is not suited for adjudicating complex factual disputes.]

JUDGMENT :

Shree Chandrashekhar, A.C.J.

The Interlocutory Applications filed for condoning the delay in preferring the present Letters Patent Appeals are taken up for hearing.

2. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances in these cases and also after going through the cause shown in these Interlocutory Applications seeking condonation of delay, we find sufficient ground to condone the delay in preferring the present Letters Patent Appeals and, accordingly, I.A. No. 7250 of 2023 in L.P.A. No. 318 of 2022, I.A No. 7246 of 2023 in L.P.A. No. 319 of 2022, I.A. No. 7248 of 2023 in L.P.A No. 320 of 2022, I.A No. 7247 of 2023 in L.P.A No. 369 of 2022 and I.A No. 7249 of 2023 in L.P.A No. 406 of 2022 are allowed.

3. In this batch of the Letters Patent Appeals, the State of Jharkhand seeks to challenge the orders passed by the writ Court on the ground that the disputed questions of fact as regards the right, title and interest in a landed property cannot be adjudicated in a writ proceeding and, that too, when serious allegations of forgery and fabrication of the records are made. In LPA No. 231 of 2022, the Chintamani Trust is aggrieved by the writ Court’s interference with the order dated 22nd October 2012 passed in Misc. Case No. 50(R)-15 of 2009-10 whereby the jamabandi opened in the name of Surajdeo Singh was cancelled. The order dated 18th April 2022 passed in W.P.(C) No. 7595 of 2012 filed by Surajdeo Singh is not put to challenge by the State of Jharkhand and, for this reason, Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, the learned counsel for the said respondent would submit that the State authorities must be held to have admitted the claim of Surajdeo Singh. He has made other independent submissions on behalf of this respondent to oppose this Letters Patent Appeal filed by the Chintamani Trust, which we shall deal with separately.

4. Before we proceed further, this requires a mention that the private respondents had approached the writ Court with a grievance that the State-authorities were not accepting rent and issuing rent receipts to them or that the jamabandi in their name was cancelled in a proceeding started by the statutory authority, or a proceeding under section 4(h) of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 was started against them. We may further indicate that all these cases and other litigations which came to this Court involved the lands comprised under Khata No.383 of Khewat No.2 at village Pundag in the capital city at Ranchi. For the stake of convenience, a few details concerning these Letters Patent Appeals are catalogued in a tabular chart hereinbelow:

L.P.A. No. 318 of 2022

5. Md. Julfan Ansari claiming right, title and interest over the land admeasuring a