Ramadhar Patel vs Rajesh Patel
2023 Latest Caselaw 694 MP

                                                       1
                           IN    THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                              AT JABALPUR
                                                    BEFORE
                                      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT
                                           ON THE 11 th OF JANUARY, 2023
                                           MISC. PETITION No. 3474 of 2022

                          BETWEEN:-
                          RAMADHAR PATEL S/O DURGHAT PATEL, AGED ABOUT
                          70    YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/O
                          BANDHWA KOTHAR (CHHIDNA), POLICE STATION AND
                          TEHSIL NAIGARHI, DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA
                          PRADESH).

                                                                             .....PETITIONER
                          (SHRI J.L. MISHRA - ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER)

                          AND
                          1.    RAJESH PATEL S/O RAMRAJ PATEL, AGED ABOUT
                                46   YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE R/O
                                BANDHWA      KOTHAR   (CHHIDNA),    POLICE
                                STATION AND TEHSIL NAIGARHI, DISTRICT
                                REWA (MADHYA PRADESH).

                          2.    SIDDHANATH PATEL S/O RAMRAJ PATEL, AGED
                                ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
                                R/O BANDHWA KOTHAR (CHHIDNA), POLICE
                                STATION AND TEHSIL NAIGARHI, DISTRICT
                                REWA (MADHYA PRADESH).

                          3.    BRIJENDRA PATEL S/O RAMRAJ PATEL, AGED
                                ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
                                R/O BANDHWA KOTHAR (CHHIDNA), POLICE
                                STATION AND TEHSIL NAIGARHI, DISTRICT
                                REWA (MADHYA PRADESH).

                          4.    SUSHILA W/O RAJESH PATEL, AGED ABOUT 42
                                Y E A R S , OCCUPATION:    AGRICULTURE R/O
                                BANDHWA       KOTHAR    (CHHIDNA),  POLICE
                                STATION AND TEHSIL NAIGARHI, DISTRICT
                                REWA (MADHYA PRADESH).

                          5.    SANTOSHI W/O SIDDHANATH PATEL, AGED
                                ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE R/O
                                BANDHWA     KOTHAR    (CHHIDNA),  POLICE
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VINOD KUMAR
TIWARI
Signing time: 1/12/2023
3:48:14 PM
                                                        2
                                  STATION AND TEHSIL NAIGARHI, DISTRICT
                                  REWA (MADHYA PRADESH).

                          6.      ANJNA W/O BRAJENDRA PATEL, AGED ABOUT 39
                                  Y E A R S , OCCUPATION:      HOUSEWIFE R/O
                                  BANDHWA       KOTHAR    (CHHIDNA), POLICE
                                  STATION AND TEHSIL NAIGARHI, DISTRICT
                                  REWA (MADHYA PRADESH).

                          7.      STATE OF M.P. THROUGH THE COLLECTOR
                                  REWA DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....RESPONDENTS
                          (SHRI M.P. SHUKLA - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS NO. 1 TO 6 AND
                          SHRI G.P. SINGH - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.
                          7/STATE)

                                  This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the

                          following:
                                                                ORDER

Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India making a prayer for setting aside of impugned orders dated 21.04.2022 and 15.03.2022.

Petitioner was plaintiff before trial Court. He had filed an application for grant of temporary injunction. His application was dismissed by the trial Court and thereafter, appeal was also dismissed. During pendency of said proceedings, respondents had already constructed a house over part of the land in question.

In view of said circumstances, no order of temporary injunction can now be granted in favour of the petitioner. Therefore, miscellaneous petition filed by petitioner is dismissed.

It goes without saying that construction which has been made by the respondents will be subject to judgment and decree which will be passed in civil suit.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD KUMAR TIWARI Signing time: 1/12/2023 3:48:14 PM

(VISHAL DHAGAT) JUDGE vkt

Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD KUMAR TIWARI Signing time: 1/12/2023 3:48:14 PM