Writ jurisdiction cannot resolve disputed property titles; such matters should be settled through civil courts, as per the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952.

JUDGMENT :

Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.

1. The instant appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment/order dated 18.03.2009 passed in W.P(C) No.1903 of 2007whereby and whereunder the Learned Single Judge was pleased to allow the writ petition and held that the Respondent/Writ Petitioner is entitled to the release of the property in his favour, directing the Appellant/Respondents to hand over the land in question to the Respondent/Writ Petitioner without any further delay.

Factual Matrix

2. The brief facts of the case as per the pleadings made in the writ petition as has been asserted in the memo of appeal, as also various affidavits filed and the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the appellant needs to be referred herein which reads as under:

(i) A piece of land is in physical possession of the appellant measuring 4.46 Acres bearing M.S. Plot No. 557 situated at Morabadi, Booti Road, Ranchi.

(ii) The said land was owned and possessed by one B.M.Lakshman Rao, maternal grand-father of the original writ petitioner occupied by the authorities of the Army in the year 1943 but the occupation of the land was admitted by the Army only with effect from 1.4.1946.

(iii) Since the property was occupied by the personnel of the Army, the said B.M.Lakshman Rao went on agitating the matter. Ultimately Army personnel agreed in the year 1957 to grant recurring compensation @ Rs.446/- per annum from 1.4.1946 to 30.3.1960. In course of time, when the value of the land increased considerably, the said B.M.Lakshman Rao took up the matter for enhancing recurring compensation to the extent of Rs.3600/- per annum which was enhanced to Rs.3600/- with effect from 1.4.1963.

(iv) B.M.Lakshman Rao died in the year 1966 and he had executed a will in favour of his son B.M.Mukund Rao, who brought a case of Probate, bearing case no.67 of 1969 in the court of Judicial Commissioner, Chotanagpur, Ranchi, who granted probate in favour of said B.M.Mukund Rao. Thereupon compensation which was due from 1963 to September, 1970 was paid.However, in the year 1974, the said B.M.Mukund Rao filed an application making request to release the property in his favour.

(v) Further,when nothing was done in the matter, an application was filed by him for enhancing the compensation to the extent of Rs.12,000/- per annum and also made request to release the land. Thereafter compensation was enhanced @ Rs.5000/- per annum with effect from1.2.1978 but no decision was taken by the authority regarding release of the property in favour of him.

(vi) The said B.M.Mukund Rao on his superannuation started living at Pune and when the wife of B.M.Mukund Rao pre-deceased her husband issueless, B.M.Mukund Rao started living at Jamshedpur with his sister Malati Rao Karnad, who also died on 14.1.1991.

(vii) Thereafter, said B.M.Mukund Rao started living with the petitioners at Jamshedpur and at some times at Pune, and ultimately died on 4.9.1998 without leaving any will.

(viii) Under this situation, original writ petitioner being sole successor to the estate of the deceased, asked for payment of arrears of compensation which had fallen due to be paid from the year 1998 and also made prayer before the authorities for release of the property but nobody made any response and, therefore, writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 1903 of 2007 has been filed with a prayer to direct the respondent to pay arrears of recurring compensation due since 1998 @ Rs.5000/- per annum and also for release of the property in terms of section 6(1-A) of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952.

(ix) During the pe