Brajmohan Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5946 MP

                                    01

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                      AT GWALIOR
                     MP No. 1599 of 2022
              [BRAJMOHAN SHARMA Vs. THE STATE OF M.P. & ANR.]

Dated: 22/04/2022;

      Shri Arshad Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner.

      Shri Ramadhar Choubey, learned Government Advocate for the

respondents/State.

This petition u/Art.227 of the Constitution of India has been

filed assailing the order dated 21/01/2022 passed by Additional

Commissioner Bhopal, Division Bhopal (M.P.) in Case

No.160/Appeal/2020-21, whereby the appeal preferred by the

petitioner has been dismissed.

The case of the petitioner is that he was granted patta in the

year 1975 with respect to the land situated at village Bedankhedi,

Tehsil Ganj Basoda, District Vidisha (M.P.) bearing survey No.34

rakva 0.470 hectare in which the petitioner had been allotted 900

sq.ft. land through panchayat. At that time, aforesaid land was under

the jurisdiction of village panchayat but now turned into urban land

which was declared by the concerning authority and survey no.34

rakva 0.470 hectare is governed by Municipal Council, Ganj Basoda,

District Vidisha (M.P.). It is further alleged that the landlord such as a

farmer namely Maharaj Singh filed a civil suit against the State as

well as present petitioner in the year 1995 bearing case

No.109A/1995 which was dismissed on 30.01.1996. Against the

order dated 30.01.1996, Maharaj Singh again preferred First Appeal

bearing case No.165-A/1997 before the appellate court by which

appellate court by affirming the order passed by trial court dismissed

the appeal on 12.10.1998. During that period, Maharaj Singh died and

his legal representatives preferred the Second Appeal bearing Second

Appeal No.121/1999 (Kishansingh and Ors. Vs. State of M.P. & Ors.)

and the said appeal was partly allowed by this Court on 25/04/2008

with the observations as mentioned in para-8; "In the result, the

appeal is allowed in part. Plaintiff's suit so far as declaration of title

is concerned, judgments and decrees of the courts below dismissing

the suit of the plaintiff is affirmed. However, his suit for injunction is

allowed to the extent that he cannot be dispossessed without

following due procedure laid down by law." During that period, the

so-called landlord owner was dispossessed by the due procedure of

law. The present petitioner preferred application u/S.109/110 for

mutation before the Tehsildar Ganj Basoda, District Vidisha (M.P.)

which was dismissed on 26.12.2019. Thereafter, the petitioner again

preferred First Appeal u/S.44 of MPLRC before the SDO Basoda,

District Vidisha (M.P.) bearing case No.188/Appeal/2019-20 and the

learned SDO by affirming the order passed by Tehsildar passed the

final order on 16/06/2020. Against the order dated 16/06/2020,

petitioner preferred Second Appeal u/S.44(2) of MPLRC before the

Additional Commissioner, Bhopal bearing case No.160/Appeal/2020-

21 but the Commissioner by affirming the order passed by SDO

dismissed the appeal of petitioner. Hence, present petition has been

filed before this Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the order

impugned being perverse, illegal and against the settled principles of

law is liable to be quashed.

On perusal of record, it is apparent that the petitioner/appellant

has failed to produce any authentic documents or patta allegedly issued

in his favour before the courts below and, therefore, his title over the

land in dispute was not found to be proved. The Khasra Panchsala in the

year 2013-14 (Annexure P/3) also shows that the land in dispute is

recorded as government land. Since, the petitioner/appellant has failed

to file any documents on the basis of which his name could be mutated,

the impugned order is found to be as per the settled principles of law

and doesn't require interference.

Consequently, this Misc. Petition sans merits and is hereby

dismissed at admission stage.

                                                                               (SUNITA YADAV)
vpn                                                                                JUDGE
                     VIPIN KUMAR
                     AGRAHARI
                     2022.04.23
                     17:08:10 +05'30'
  VALSALA
  VASUDEVAN
  2018.10.26
  15:14:29 -07'00'