Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, ARUN KUMAR
Soni – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition for restoration of possession. (Para 1) |
| 2. background of property ownership and disputes. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. allegations of dispossession. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. trial court's orders and their implications. (Para 8 , 10) |
| 5. arguments surrounding jurisdiction and authority. (Para 9 , 11) |
| 6. contentions on legal authority and remedy. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 7. conclusion on abuse of process and authority. (Para 38 , 39) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-
i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the respondent no. 2 to 7 to open the lock and restore the possession of the petitioner over her joint ancestral house.
ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the State Government to take appropriate action against the Respondent no. 4, 5, 6 and 7 for crushing the rule of law.
FACTS OF THE CASE
2. The case of the petitioner is that her father-in-law namely, Gelhari was a co-tenure holder of plot No.211, area 0.431 hectare. After his death, the names of the petitioner’s husband Shyamji, his brothers Premji, Ramji and Lalji and their mother Shivdhari Devi came to
The court ruled that administrative actions and orders from the trial court lacking due procedural safeguards lead to wrongful dispossession.
The court held that ex parte injunctions must adhere to proper legal process, emphasizing the necessity of hearing all parties and verifying possession before enforcement, thereby invalidating the ad....
The trial court's ex parte orders for possession were illegal, necessitating due process and rightful hearings before dispossessing parties from joint property.
Administrative authorities cannot interfere in civil property disputes pending before a competent court, and dispossession must follow due process of law.
In property disputes, proof of ownership and lawful possession must be established; mere claims without supporting evidence lead to dismissal of injunction requests.
The court established that inherent powers under Section 151 of the CPC can be exercised to restore possession when parties have been wrongfully dispossessed, irrespective of the formal dismissal of ....
The executing court cannot deliver possession without a final decree, and unregistered deeds do not confer valid rights; dispossession without due process is illegal.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
