Nilesh Kumar Tiwari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 9467 MP

                                                                         1
                                        IN    THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                             AT JABALPUR
                                                                  BEFORE
                                                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                                              ON THE 23 rd OF JUNE, 2023
                                                          WRIT PETITION No. 2275 of 2023

                                       BETWEEN:-
                                       NILESH KUMAR TIWARI S/O LATE RAMESH KUMAR
                                       TIWARI, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                                       SERVICE R/O GRAM POST TEONTHAR, DISTRICR
                                       REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                      .....PETITIONER
                                       (BY SHRI AJAY PAL SINGH - ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER)

                                       AND
                                       1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                                             SECRETARY URBAN ADMINISTRATION VALLABH
                                             BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       2.    COLLECTOR R EWA DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA
                                             PRADESH)

                                       3.    MUNICIPAL COUNCIL TEONTHAR THROUGH
                                             CHIEF     EXECUTIVE    OFFICER TEONTHAR
                                             DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                    .....RESPONDENTS
                                       (BY SHRI JITENDRA SHRIVASTAVA - PANEL LAWYER FOR THE STATE)
                                       (BY SHRI K.C. GHILDIYAL - SENIOR ADVOCATE ASSISTED BY SHRI
                                       KARNIK SINGH)

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

This Miscellaneous Petition is filed by the petitioner claiming relief that

Signature Not Verified SAN Annexure P-4 which is an order passed by the Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar

Digitally signed by MOHD TABISH KHAN Date: 2023.06.24 18:50:15 IST Parishad, Teother dated 02.09.20222 be quashed and the respondents be

directed to allow the petitioner to reside in the accommodation in question.

Petitioner's contention is that petitioner's father after obtaining permission from the concerned Gram Panchayat had constructed the said accommodation in which now petitioner is residing.

It is submitted that since petitioner is residing for so many years in the said accommodation, therefore, his possession be not disturbed.

Shri K.C. Ghildiyal, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Karnik Singh submits that petitioner's father Shri Ramesh Prasad Tiwari s/o Devraj Tiwari had filed a civil suit before the Court of Civil Judge, Class-II, Teonther. That suit was registered as RCS 58-A/1996. In that very suit, it is mentioned

that petitioner's father had taken possession of House No.H-17 which is a Government House and which was vacant in anticipation of its allotment. Thus, first limb of the argument advanced by the counsel for the petitioner that petitioner's father had constructed the said house is not made out. Secondly, that suit was decided vide judgment and decree dated 28.01.1991 and said suit was dismissed.

Against dismissal of that suit, an appeal registered as Regular Civil Appeal No.23-A/1999 was instituted in the Court of Additional District Judge, Rewa. It was decided vide judgment and decree dated 24.09.2021 whereby the order of the trial Court was upheld and appeal was dismissed. Thereafter petitioner after death of his father filed another suit before the Civil Judge, Class-II, Teonther which came to be registered as RCS 271-A/2022. That too was dismissed vide order dated 04.02.2023. Thereafter, petitioner filed an appeal before the Additional District Judge, Teonther which is registered as Signature Not Verified SAN

RCS No.10-A/2023. It is submitted that suppressing all these facts, petitioner Digitally signed by MOHD TABISH KHAN Date: 2023.06.24 18:50:15 IST

has filed this petition. He has even wrongly mentioned name of his father

inappropriately as Ramesh Kumar Tiwari whereas it is evident from the documents filed by the respondents along with their return that name of his father was Ramesh Prasad Tiwari s/o Devraj Tiwari as is mentioned in the plaint as well as in the cause title of the orders decided by the learned Civil Judge and the Additional District Judge. In the Civil Suit bearing No.RCS No.271/2022 he has shown himself to be son of Ramesh Prasad Tiwari whereas in the writ petition he has given incorrect title by showing himself to be son of Ramesh Kumar Tiwari and under such facts and circumstances, it is prayed that petitioner is guilty of suppression of true and correct facts and, therefore, the petition be dismissed.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, and taking this submission made by Shri Ajay Pal Singh into consideration, that he has argued what was instructed by his client, opportunity of to file rejoinder is denied, taking this fact into consideration that copy of return filed on behalf of respondent No.3 was handed over to the petitioner's counsel on 01.05.2023, thereafter more than 45 days time has lapsed. Petitioner's counsel had sufficient opportunity to seek instructions on the documentary evidence which is filed by respondent No.3. Thus, such unscrupulous litigation cannot be allowed to be promoted and prosper at the hands of such unscrupulous litigants who have suppressed material facts from this Court. Therefore, petition for suppression of facts and

also on merits, deserves to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed.

Petitioner to bear cost of the respondent No.3 which is quantified at Rs.5,000/-

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by MOHD TABISH KHAN Date: 2023.06.24 18:50:15 IST

(VIVEK AGARWAL)

JUDGE Tabish

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by MOHD TABISH KHAN Date: 2023.06.24 18:50:15 IST