Inherent powers under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure cannot be invoked to stay statutory revenue proceedings when they relate to distinct land parcels and the applicant has access to efficacious alternative legal remedies.

NAFR

Judgment on Board

1. This Civil Revision has been preferred by the applicant/plaintiff assailing the legality, propriety and correctness of the order dated 01.01.2026 passed by the learned 2nd Civil Judge, Class-II, Katghora, District Korba (C.G.) in MJC (Civil) No. 19/2025, whereby the application filed by the applicant under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in proceedings under Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC has been dismissed.

2. (a) Brief facts, as projected by the applicant, are that the applicant along with co-plaintiff Smt. Preeti Devi Modi are the registered owners and in possession of the agricultural lands situated at Village Arda, Patwari Halka No. 07, Revenue Circle Jawali, Tehsil Katghora, District Korba (C.G.), bearing Khasra Nos. 217/34 and 217/56 admeasuring total 4.440 hectares in the name of the applicant and Khasra Nos. 217/44 and 217/60A admeasuring total 2.525 hectares in the name of co-plaintiff Smt. Preeti Devi Modi, wife of the present applicant.

(b) It is averred that after execution of registered sale deeds in the year 2005 in favour of the applicant and his wife by the original owner namely Ratan Lal S/o Thunuram, Shivcharan Yadav S/o Shri Dayaram Yadav and Mohit Das S/o Sona Das, possession of the said lands was handed over and the names of the applicant as well as the co-plaintiff were duly recorded in the revenue records. The applicant further developed the land by planting fruit-bearing trees, eucalyptus and teak trees, and also constructed fencing, a watchman house, a garden and a temple for protection and maintenance of the property.

(c) It is further pleaded that on 16.07.2025, the officials of SECL, Korba, without any prior notice or lawful authority, forcibly entered the suit land and started digging the same with the help of heavy machinery after damaging the boundary. Despite objections and complaints made by the applicant before the revenue and police authorities, the SECL allegedly continued their attempts to interfere with the peaceful possession of the applicant over the suit land.

(d) In such circumstances, the applicant along with the co-plaintiff instituted a civil suit for declaration and permanent injunction, which was registered as Civil Suit No. 47-A/2025. The trial Court, vide order dated 30.09.2025, allowed the application under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC filed by the plaintiffs (applicant herein) and granted temporary injunction in their favour, while rejecting the similar application filed by the defendants. It is further stated that prior thereto, on 18.07.2025, in proceedings under Section 250(3) of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959, the Tehsildar, Katghora had directed the parties to maintain status quo with respect to the land in question. Subsequently, a suo motu proceeding under Section 248 of the Land Revenue Code, 1959 was initiated against the applicant on 09.10.2025 by the Tehsildar, Katghora.

3. Being aggrieved by the alleged violation of the temporary injunction order dated 30.09.2025 and continuation of eviction proceedings, the applicant filed an application under Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC with regard to the consequence of disobedience or breach of injunction along with an application under Section 151 CPC seeking stay of the proceedings initiated under Section 248 of the Land Revenue Code.

4. The learned trial Court, however, vide the impugned order date