Madhya Pradesh High Court
Deceased Smt. Manju Bai W/O Jeevanlal ... vs Nilesh on 1 April, 2024
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
ON THE 1 st OF APRIL, 2024
WRIT PETITION No. 7816 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
1. DECEASED SMT. MANJU BAI W/O JEEVANLAL
KHATIK THROUGH LRS. SMT. VIDYABAI THR
POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLD VIJAY S/O
JEEVANLAL R/O VILLAGE KHILCHIPURA DISTT.
MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. DECEASED SMT. MANJU BAI W/O JEEVANLAL
KHATIK THROUGH LRS. SMT. INDRABAI THR
POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER VIJAY S/O
JEEVANLAL R/O VILLAGE KHILCHIPURA DISTT.
MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. DECEASED SMT. MANJU BAI W/O JEEVANLAL
KHATIK THROUGH LRS. MANOHAR THR POWER
OF ATTORNEY HOLDER VIJAY S/O JEEVANLAL
R/O VILLAGE KHILCHIPURA DISTT. MANDSAUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. VIJAY S/O JEEVANLAL OCCUPATION: LABOUR
VILLAGE KHILCHIPURA TEHSIL AND DIST
MANDSUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. DEEPAK THROUGH GURADIAN UNCLE VIJAY S/O
JEEVANLAL VILLAGE KHILCHIPURA TEHSIL AND
DIST MANDSUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
6. DEEPIKA THROUGH GURADIAN UNCLE VIJAY S/O
JEEVANLAL VILLAGE KHILCHIPURA TEHSIL AND
DIST MANDSUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI POURUSH RANKA-ADVOCATE)
AND
1. NILESH S/O SHIKHAR CHAND RATADIYA
OCCUPATION: BUSINESS R/O RAMTEKRI DISTT.
MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRAVEEN
Signing time: 03-04-
2024 19:13:37
2
2. SMT. NOORJAHAN W/O AZAR KHAN
OCCUPATION: NOT KNOWN MANDIGATE DIST
MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. NIYAZ MOHAMMAD S/O FATEH KHAN
OCCUPATION: NOT KNOWN KHILCHIPURA DIST
MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER UJJAIN DIVISION
(MADHYA PRADESH)
5. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER REVENUE BLOCK
MANDSAUR DIST MANDSAUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
6. NAIB TEHSILDAR TEHSIL AND DIST MANDSAUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
T h is petition coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
following:
ORDER
Petitioners have filed the present Writ Petition against the order dated
15.01.2024 passed by Additional Commissioner, Ujjain Division Ujjain and
order dated 07.04.2022 passed by Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Block
Mandsaur, District Mandsaur.
Facts of the cases;
[2] Late Smt. Manjuladevi filed Civil Suit for declaration and permanent
injunction against Bharat Kumar and Smt. Noorjahan in respect of land survey
No.99 (new number 35/1 srs 7.32 or 74.32 sqft.) According to the petitioners
there are four shops constructed on the aforesaid land which she purchased on
09.11.2001 by way of registered sale deed. She was in jail from 2002 to 2006
and the defendant No.1 prepared forge Power of Attorney and sold the land to
the defendant No.2 on 05.07.2003. Thereafter the defendant No.2 constructed
the shops. Vide judgment dated 01.12.2015, the Civil Suit decreed in favour of
the plaintiffs by declaring Power of Attorney and sale deed as void. The
defendant No.2 was restrained to sale the shops.
[3] After the aforesaid judgment Manjuladevi filed an application under
Section 250 of MPLRC before the Tehsildar seeking dispossession of the
defendants. Vide order dated 01.11.2021, the application was allowed by
directing the Revenue Inspector to dispossess the defendants and hand over the
vacant possession to the plaintiffs.
[4] Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order the Nilesh preferred an Appeal
before the Sub Divisional Officer, Block Mandsaur District Mandsaur which
was allowed vide order dated 17.01.2022 by remanding back the matter to the
Tehsildar for deciding afresh. Meanwhile the Manjuladevi expired and legal heirs
were brought on record. After the remand, again Naib Tehsildar passed an
order dated 26.08.2022 in favour of the legal heirs of Manjuladevi. Nilesh
preferred an Appeal before the Sub Divisional Officer, Block Mandsaur District
Mandsaur which came on the allowed vide order dated 07.10.2022 on the
ground that the provision of Section 250 of MPLRC applies to vacant
agricultural not to building.
[5] Being aggrieved by order dated 07.10.2022, the legal heirs of
Manjuladevi preferred an Appeal before the Commissioner, Ujjain Division,
Ujjain which came to be dismissed vide order dated 15.01.2024, hence, present
Writ Petition before this Court.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.
[6] Admittedly, the Manjuladevi filed Civil Suit and obtained the decree of
title and got the sale deed in favour of defendants declared void. In the said
Civil Suit, she did not seek the decree of possession. Even at the time of filing
of Civil Suit, the land was not vacant and there were four shops were
constructed on it. The land was not used for agriculture purpose. The
contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that without diversion the
shops were constructed therefore the land in question is liable to be treated as
agriculture land and for which the proceedings under Section 250 of MPLRC
are maintainable.
[7] Admittedly, the land is not vacant land and not used for agriculture
purpose. There are four shops were constructed on it. The decree cannot be
obtained invoking the provision of MPLRC which applies only on limited
circumstances, when the Bhoomiswami was dispossessed illegally within the
period of two months. In this case after contesting the Civil Suit, the
proceedings of under Section 250 of MPLRC were sought to be invoked for
obtained the vacant possession of the shops.
[8] In view of the above, the Commissioner, Ujjain Division, District
Ujjain has not committed any error in dismissing the Appeal.
Accordingly, Writ Petition is hereby dismissed.
(VIVEK RUSIA)
JUDGE
Praveen
