Allahabad High Court
Ram Dulari vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 21 March, 2023
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, Manjive Shukla
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 40
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8637 of 2023
Petitioner :- Ram Dulari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Anoop Bhaiya Lal Shukla
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Hon'ble Manjive Shukla,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Arun Kumra Gupta, learned Standing Counsel.
In view of the order proposed to be passed, notices need not go to respondent no.3.
Present writ petition has been preferred for a direction to respondent no.2-Senior Superintendent of Police, Jaunpur to decide the application of the petitioner dated 30.11.2022 and to provide the police force to the petitioner for construction of boundary over plot no.758/0.332 hect. as well as for a direction to the respondents to comply with the order of execution court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the father-in-law of the petitioner has filed a suit for permanent injunction before the Civil Judge (JD) 6th, Court No.27, Jaunpur against the father of respondent no.3 being Original Suit No.116 of 1990 (Furat v. Jai Mangal), which was decreed vide judgment and order dated 8.4.2013. Against the said order, the defendant had filed first appeal, which was also dismissed vide order dated 16.12.2019. It is also submitted that the father of respondent no.4 had also filed suit for permanent injunction being Civil Suit No.514 of 1996 (Jai Mangal v. Fursat), which was dismissed on 27.2.2012. Against the same, the father of respondent no.4 filed Civil Appeal No.31 of 2012 (Jai mangal v. Ram Dulari), which was also dismissed by the appellate court on 4.9.2015. Against the same, the respondent no.4 filed second appeal before this Court being Second Appeal No.1040 of 2015 (Jai Mangal v. Ram Dulari), which was also dismissed vide order dated 30.12.2015. Consequently, the petitioner filed Execution Case No.3 of 2020 (Ram Dulari v. Lochan) before the Addl. Civil Judge (JD) IInd New Court, Jaunpur, which was allowed on 31.10.2022 and the order of trial court was directed to be complied with. Consequently, the possession in question was handed over in favour of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, in this backdrop, states once the petitioner has started raising construction of boundary wall, the respondent has again started hindrance in peaceful possession of the petitioner and stop the construction of the boundary wall. In this regard, the petitioner has also moved representation before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Jaunpur on 30.11.2022 but the same is still pending consideration.
Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, has submitted that in case the representation of the petitioner is still pending consideration, the same shall be decided strictly in accordance with law expeditiously.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue and with the consent, the writ petition stands disposed of asking respondent no.2 to look into, examine and redress the grievance of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law but certainly after giving opportunity to all the stake holders in the matter and in case there is no other legal impediment, police assistance may be accorded to the petitioner for raising the construction in question on payment of usual charges.
Order Date :- 21.3.2023
SP/
