Omprakash Gupta & Ors vs The State Of Jharkhand & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 3626 Jhar

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                        [Civil Writ Jurisdiction]
                         W.P.(C) No. 3070 of 2008
     Omprakash Gupta & Ors.                              .... .. ...     Petitioners
                             Versus
     The State of Jharkhand & Ors.                                .. ... ... Respondents

                                ...........

CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO (Through :-Video Conferencing) .........

For the Petitioners : Ms. Amrita Sinha, Advocate For the Resp.-State : Mr. P.C. Roy, S.C. (L&C)-I ......

07/ 27.09.2021.

Heard, learned counsel for the petitioners- Ms. Amrita Sinha and learned S.C. (L&C)-I appearing for the State, Mr. P.C. Roy.

Learned counsel for the petitioners- Ms. Amrita Sinha has submitted that the petitioner has purchased the land in question from one Krishna Kumari Devi vide Registered Sale deed No.712 dated 22.12.1969. However, Krishna Kumari Devi was given this land in gift dated 24.07.1997 which was subsequently cancelled on 22.03.1954 by the Collector, but the said order has already been set aside by the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Patna in MJC No.173 of 1954, as such, Krishna Kumari Devi has every right to execute sale deed with respect to the land of 12 dhurs, Plot No.815, Khata No.413, Ward No.4, notified area P.S. Jugsalai, Town- Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum, in favour of petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner- Ms. Amrita Sinha has further submitted that the original writ- petitioner has also filed Title Suit No.30 of 1990 against the State. Even after notice, the State did not choose to contest the case and thus, ex-parte judgment dated 31.01.1991 has been passed in favour of the original writ petitioner, father of the present petitioners and the decree was signed on 11.02.1991, as such, the order impugned passed by the Deputy Commissioner is completely without jurisdiction and contrary to the judgment and decree passed by the Sub -Judge in Title Suit No.30 of 1990.

Considering the same, this Court directs learned counsel for the petitioner to file order passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Patna passed in M.J.C. No.173 of 1954.

Put up this case after four weeks.

In the meantime, Mr. P.C. Roy, learned S.C. (L&C)-I appearing for the State is directed to file a detail counter-affidavit sworn by the Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur with proper explanation that :-

(a) Whether the judgment and decree passed by the Sub Judge in Title Suit No.30 of 1990 is binding upon the State or not?

(b) Whether the State has preferred any legal remedy under the law available to them? If not, then why the judgment and decree has not been honoured till date?

Put up this case after four weeks.

(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.) sandeep