IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY DWIVEDI ON THE 3^rd OF NOVEMBER, 2022 WRIT PETITION No. 23816 of 2022 BETWEEN:-

AMIT VERMA S/O SHRI LAXMI NARAYAN VERMA R/O VILLAGE GUMGAON, DABAJHEER, POST CHAND, P.S. CHAND, DISTT.

CHHINDWARA (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (PETITIONER IN PERSON)

AND

1. SMT. RAMSHEELA BAI JANGELA W/O SHIVDAS JANGELA R/O NEAR GOVT. SCHOOL CHAND, DISTT. CHHINDWARA (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. SMT. BINGATI BAI VERMA W/O LATE SHRI JAGANNATH VERMA R/O VILLAGE GUMGAON DABAJHEER POST CHAND P.S CHAND (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. CHAIN SINGH VERMA S/O LATE SHRI JAGANNATH VERMA R/O VILLAGE GUMGAON DABAJHEER POST CHAND P.S CHAND (MADHYA PRADESH)

4. PHOOL SINGH VERMA S/O LATE SHRI JAGANNATH VERMA R/O VILLAGE GUMGAON DABAJHEER POST CHAND P.S CHAND (MADHYA PRADESH)

5. ANGAD SINGH VERMA S/O LATE SHRI JAGANNATH VERMA R/O VILLAGE GUMGAON DABAJHEER POST CHAND P.S CHAND (MADHYA PRADESH)

6. SMT. SUSHEELA BAI VERMA W/O LATE SHRI RAM VERMA R/O VILLAGE GUMGAON DABAJHEER POST CHAND P.S CHAND (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (NONE)

This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

By the instant petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has claimed the following relief(s):-

"I request the High Court of Jabalpur that PLEASE cancel the ANNEXURE NO-[7] AND RELATED ALL WORDS AND ANCESTRAL FARMING LAND DISTRIBUTION.

please cancel all the disputed measles numbers:-125[S] SMT RAMSHILA PATI SHIVDAS, 123[S], 124 CHAIN SINGH VERMA, 237/1/2 FULSINGH PITA JAGANNATH, 280/3 [S] SMT SUSHILA BEWA SHRIRAM, 237/6 AND 239/1 SMT OM KUMARI VERMA W/O CHAIN SINGH VERMA, KINDLY CANCEL ANNEXURE NO-[1] TO ANNEXURE [8]."

From the relief(s) claimed and averments made in the petition, it can be easily gathered that the petitioner is raising civil dispute asking that batwaranama (Annexure-P/3) which got executed between two private persons in respect of some immovable property be cancelled.

It is a settled principle of law that a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot be issued to resolve a civil dispute between the private parties. Considering the factual aspects as have been mentioned in the petition and the arguments advanced by the petitioner himself, he was advised that rather to file this petition, he should avail appropriate remedy where the immovable property situates, but he was unable to understand as to which authority should be approached and repeatedly he was asking this Court to interfere in the matter.

Since this Court does not have any jurisdiction to interfere in the dispute involved in this case, which is in fact of civil nature that too between two private parties, therefore, the petition filed by the petitioner stands dismissed granting him a liberty to avail the appropriate remedy before the competent Court of law.

(SANJAY DWIVEDI)

JUDGE Devashish DEVASHISH MISHRA +05'30'