Patna High Court
Prashant Rajgarhia vs Nishant Raj on 31 January, 2025
Author: Arun Kumar Jha
Bench: Arun Kumar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.157 of 2025
======================================================
1. Prashant Rajgarhia S/O Late Ajay Kumar Rahgarhia R/O Mohalla- Lal
Bazar Bettiah ward no.33, under Bettiah Nagar Parishad, P.O. and P.S.
Bettiah Town, District West-Champaran, presently residing at B.125/126,
Central Park, G.I.D.C., P.O. and PS Pandesara, P.S Pandesara, District-Surat,
Gujarat
2. Sneha Lata Rajgarhia Snehlata, Widow of Late Ajay Kumar Rajgarhia R/O
Mohalla- Lal Bazar Bettiah ward no.33, under Bettiah Nagar Parishad, P.O.
and P.S. Bettiah Town, District West-Champaran, presently residing at
B.125/126, Central Park, G.I.D.C., P.O. and PS Pandesara, P.S Pandesara,
District-Surat, Gujarat.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. Nishant Raj S/O Govind Prasad Rajgarhia R/O Mohalla Lal Bazar ward no.
33, under Bettiah Nagar Parishad, P.O. and P.S. Bettiah Town District West
Champaran.
2. Amit Kumar Rajgarhia, S/O Late Ajay Kumar Rajgarhia, R/o Mohalla Lal
Bazar ward no.33, under Bettiah Nagar Parishad, P.O. and P.S. Bettiah Town
District West Champaran, Presently R/O Mohalla Prestige Ackopolis, House
Road, P.O. Giveknagar, P.S Adugodi, Bangalore, Karnataka.
3. Smt. Shalu Agarwal, D/O Late Ajay Rajgarhia, W/O Sri Sumit Agarwal,
R/O 4-C Sagar Apartment, Parle Point P.S. Umra P.O SVR College, Surat
Gujarat.
4. Smt. Pooja Agrawal, D/O Late Ajay Kumar Rajgarhiya W/O Sri Neeraj
Agrawal R/O of Mahalla A.12. Nirala Nagar, P.O. and P.S. Nirala Nagar
Lucknow (U.P)
5. Anita Agrawal, Widow of Late Bimal Rajgarhia R/O C. 503 Shyam Tirth
Apartment opposite Satyam Status near Chandan Party Plot Satellite,
Ahmedabad, Gujarat.
6. Ram Agrawal alias Ram Rajgarhia, S/O Late Bisal Rajgarhia, R/O C. 503
Shyam Tirth Apartment opposite Satyam Status near Chandan Party Plot
Satellite, Ahmedabad, Gujarat.
7. Krishna Devi, D/O Late Bimal Rajgarhia R/O C. 503 Shyam Tirth
Apartment opposite Satyam Status near Chandan Party Plot Satellite,
Ahmedabad, Gujarat.
8. Baby Devi, D/O Late Bimal Rahgarhia R/O C. 503 Shyam Tirth Apartment
opposite Satyam Status near Chandan Party Plot Satellite, Ahmedabad,
Gujarat.
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.157 of 2025 dt.31-01-2025
2/13
9. Birendra Kumar Srivastava, S/O Late Sarjug Prasad R/O Mohalla
Banuchhpar, P.O, Bettiah, P.S Bettiah Mufassil, Bettiah, West Champaran.
10. Govind Prasad Rajgarhia, S/O Late Surajmal Rajgarhia, R/O Mohalla Lal
Bazar ward no.33, under Bettiah Nagar Parishad, P.O. and P.S. Bettiah Town
District West Champaran.
11. Poonam Saraf, W/O Om Prakash Saraf, R/O Mohalla Lal Bazar, Church
Road, Ward No. 24, P.O. and P.S.- Bettiah, District-West Champaran.
12. Ravi Kumar Goenka, S/O Late Bhagwan Das Goenka, R/O Mohalla Lal
Bazar Bettiah, Christian Quarter, Ward No. 24, P.O and P.S- Bettiah,
District-West Champaran.
13. Sudha Goenka, W/O Ravi Kumar Goenka, R/O Mohalla Lal Bazar Bettiah
Christian Quarter, Ward No. 24, P.O and P.S- Bettiah, District-West
Champaran.
14. Atul Kumar Goenka, S/O Late Bhagwan Das Goenka, R/O Mohalla Lal
Bazar Bettiah, Christian Quarter, Ward No. 24, P.O and P.S- Bettiah,
District-West Champaran.
15. Soni Goenka, W/O Atul Kumar Goenka, R/O Mohalla- Lal Bazar Bettiah,
Christian Quarter, Ward No. 24, P.O and P.S- Bettiah, District-West
Champaran.
16. Sanjay Kumar Goenka, S/O Late Bhagwan Das Goenka, R/o Mohalla-Lal
Bazar, Christian Quarter, Ward No. 24, P.O and P.S- Bettiah, District-West
Champaran.
17. Jyoti Goenka, W/O Sanjay Kumar Goenka, R/O Mohalla-Lal Bazar,
Christian Quarter, Ward No. 24, P.O and P.S- Bettiah, District-West
Champaran.
18. Babita Sharma, W/O Dr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, R/O Mohalla-Vivekanand
Colony, Pashchim Gumti Banuchhapar, Bettiah, P.S- Bettiah Muffasil, P.O-
Bettiah, District-West Champaran.
19. Arun Kumar Rai, S/O Late Brajishor Rai, R/O Mohalla- Loharpatti, Bettiah
Ward No. 01, P.O.-Barwat Pasrain, P.S- Bettiah Muffasil, District-West
Champaran.
20. Jai Prakash Gupta, S/o - Late Bhikari Prasad, R/o - Mohalla- Kamalnath
Nagar, Bettiah, Azad Path Gali, Ward No. 23, P.O. and P.S. - Bettiah,
District- West Champaran.
21. Ashok Kumar Poddar, S/O Late Radha Kishan Poddar, R/O Mohalla-Lal
Bazar. Hazarimal Dharamshala Market, Bettiah, Ward No.24, P.O and P.S -
Bettiah, District-West Champaran.
22. Brij Kishor Nathani, S/O Late Kishan Prasad Nathani, R/O 126, Ambika
Saw Mills, Near Syndicate Bank, Kadipur, Gurgaon, Haryana.
23. Bhawna Priya, W/O Jai Prakash Gupta, R/O Azad Path Gali, Kamalnath
Nagar, Ward No. 23, P.O and P.S - Bettiah, District-West Champaran.
24. Sharda Devi, W/O Kedar Prasad, R/O Mohalla-Ujjain Tola, Shanti Nagar,
Bettiah, P.O and P.S- Bettiah, District, District-West Champaran.
25. Om Prakash Saraf, S/O Late Vishwanath Prasad Saraf, R/O Mohalla-Lal
Bazar, Church Road, Bettiah, Ward No. 24, P.O. and P.S- Bettiah, District-
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.157 of 2025 dt.31-01-2025
3/13
West Champaran.
26. Chanda Mohan Ojha, S/O Late Muktinath Ojha, R/O Village- Lohiyaria,
Jadochapar, P.O.-Lohoyaria, P.S-Chanpatia, District-West Champaran.
27. Amit Kumar Rai, S/O Late Maheshwar Prasad Rai, R/O Village- Bilaspur,
P.O and P.S - Ramnagar, District- West Champaran.
28. Ruby Rai, W/O Amit Kumar Rai, R/O Village- Bilaspur, P.O and P.S
Ramnagar, District-West Champaran.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Parth Gaurav, Advocate
Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Kumar Saurav, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ashish Giri, Sr. Advocate
Mr.Vijay Shanker Tiwari, Advocate
Ms. Abhilasha Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 31-01-2025
Record has been taken up on mentioning being
made on behalf of the petitioners.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as
well as learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of
respondent nos. 1 and 10.
3. The petitioners have approached this Court
seeking direction to the learned Subordinate Judge I, West
Champaran, Bettiah for disposal of applications pending before
it in Title Suit No. 68 of 2020 and for this reason I do not think
notice is required for other respondents.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
earlier vide order dated 18.01.2021, the learned trial court
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.157 of 2025 dt.31-01-2025
4/13
ordered for maintaining status quo over the suit property
restraining the parties. Thereafter, an application has been filed
on behalf of defendant nos. 1 and 10 on 18.11.2021 seeking
recall of the ex-parte order. Furtheremore, a number of
applications have been filed on behalf of the
plaintiffs/petitioners which are still pending before it and these
applications are not being taken up for disposal. Meanwhile,
respondent no. 1 filed Civil Miscellaneous No. 04 of 2025
seeking direction to the learned trial court for disposal of
appliction dated 18.11.2021 filed for vacating the order of status
quo and the same was disposed of on 09.01.1025 directing the
learned trial court to dispose of the application within a month
from the date of order. But the respondent no. 1 did not inform
the Court that injunction applicatiosns filed by the plaintiffs are
still pending. Learned counsel further submits that the learned
trial court may be directed to dispose of the applications filed
by the plaintiffs along with application filed by defendant nos. 1
and 10 for recall of the ex-parte order dated 18.01.2021.
5. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of
defendant/respondent nos. 1 and 10 submits that the petitioners
have not approached this Court with clean hands and have
suppressed the fact that it is the plaintiffs/petitioners who have
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.157 of 2025 dt.31-01-2025
5/13
been lingering the matter before the learned trial court. The
application seeking injunction was filed against defendant nos. 1
and 10 only and ex-parte order was passed for maintaining
status quo till the appearance of the defendants. But when the
defendant nos. 1 and 10 appeared, the order was construed as
having been passed against all the defendants and it was
contended by the plaintiffs that till all the defendants come on
board, no order should be passed on recall petition and in that
manner, the recall petition dated 18.11.2021 has been kept
pending. Learned counsel further submits that thereafter these
plaintiffs who have been taking time before the learned trial
court delaying the matter.
6. Learned senior counsel further submits that there
is no occasion for this Court to issue direction to the learned
trial court in the present matter as powers under Article 227 of
the Constitution cannot be invoked in casual manner to interfere
with the day-today functionary of the subordinate courts. With
regard to power under Article 227, learned counsel refers to
some decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court wherein the
scope and jurisdiction of Article 227 have been discussed. In the
case of Jai Singh and Others Vs. Municipal Corporation of
Delhi and Another, reported in (2010) 9 SCC 385 with regard
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.157 of 2025 dt.31-01-2025
6/13
to power of the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution
of India. Paragraph no. 42 reads as under:-
"42. Undoubtedly, the High Court has the power to
reach injustice whenever, wherever found. The scope
and ambit of Article 227 of the Constitution of India
had been discussed in the case of The Estralla Rubber
Vs. Dass Estate (P) Ltd., [(2001) 8 SCC 97] wherein it
was observed as follows:
"The scope and ambit of exercise of power and
jurisdiction by a High Court under Article 227
of the Constitution of India is examined and
explained in a number of decisions of this
Court. The exercise of power under this article
involves a duty on the High Court to keep
inferior courts and tribunals within the bounds
of their authority and to see that they do the
duty expected or required of them in a legal
manner. The High Court is not vested with any
unlimited prerogative to correct all kinds of
hardship or wrong decisions made within the
limits of the jurisdiction of the subordinate
courts or tribunals. Exercise of this power and
interfering with the orders of the courts or
tribunals is restricted to cases of serious
dereliction of duty and flagrant violation of
fundamental principles of law or justice, where
if the High Court does not interfere, a grave
injustice remains uncorrected. It is also well
settled that the High Court while acting under
this article cannot exercise its power as an
appellate court or substitute its own judgment in
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.157 of 2025 dt.31-01-2025
7/13
place of that of the subordinate court to correct
an error, which is not apparent on the face of
the record. The High Court can set aside or
ignore the findings of facts of an inferior court
or tribunal, if there is no evidence at all to
justify or the finding is so perverse, that no
reasonable person can possibly come to such a
conclusion, which the court or tribunal has
come to.""
Further, the learned counsel for the respondents refers
to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Manohar Lal (Dead) by Lrs. Vs. Ugrasen (dead) Lrs. and
Others, reported in (2010) 11 SCC 557, paragraph nos. 48, 49
and 51 of which read as under:-
"48. The present appellants had also not disclosed that
land allotted to them falls in commercial area. When a
person approaches a Court of Equity in exercise of its
extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226/227 of the
Constitution, he should approach the Court not only
with clean hands but also with clean mind, clean heart
and clean objective. "Equally, the judicial process
should never become an instrument of appreciation or
abuse or a means in the process of the Court to subvert
justice." Who seeks equity must do equity. The legal
maxim "Jure naturaw aequum est neminum cum
alterius detrimento et injuria fieri locupletiorem",
means that it is a law of nature that one should not be
enriched by the loss or injury to another. (vide The
Ramjas Foundation & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors.
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.157 of 2025 dt.31-01-2025
8/13
AIR 1993 SC 852; K.P. Srinivas Vs. R.M. Premchand
& ors. (1994) 6 SCC 620 and Nooruddin Vs. (Dr.) K.L.
Anand (1995) 1 SCC 249, para 9).
49. Similarly, in Ramniklal N. Bhutta & Anr. Vs. State
of Maharashtra & Ors. AIR 1997 SC 1236, this Court
observed as under:-
"10. The power under Article 226 is
discretionary. It will be exercised only in
furtherance of interest of justice and not merely
on the making out of a legal point.....the interest
of justice and the public interest coalesce. They
are very often one and the same. ..... The Courts
have to weigh the public interest vis-a-vis the
private interest while exercising....any of their
discretionary powers." (Emphasis added).
51. In Abdul Rahman Vs. Prasony Bai & Anr. AIR 2003
SC 718; S.J.S. Business Enterprises (P) Ltd. Vs. State
of Bihar & Ors. (2004) 7 SCC 166; and Oswal Fats &
Oils Ltd. Vs. Addl. Commissioner (Admn), Bareily
Division, Bareily & Ors. JT 2010 (3) SC 510, this
Court held that whenever the Court comes to the
conclusion that the process of the Court is being
abused, the Court would be justified in refusing to
proceed further and refuse relief to the party. This rule
has been evolved out of need of the Courts to deter a
litigant from abusing the process of the Court by
deceiving it."
Learned counsel next refers to the decision of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of TGN Kumar Vs. State of
Kerala and Others, reported in (2011)2 SCC 772, paragraph
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.157 of 2025 dt.31-01-2025
9/13
nos. 13 and 14 of which reads as under:-
13. Similarly, while it is true that the power of
superintendence conferred on the High Court
under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is
both administrative and judicial, but such power
is to be exercised sparingly and only in
appropriate cases in order to keep the
subordinate courts within the bounds of their
authority. In any event, the power of
superintendence cannot be exercised to
influence the subordinate (1977) 4 SCC 551
judiciary to pass any order or judgment in a
particular manner.
14. In Jasbir Singh Vs. State of Punjab10, this
Court observed that:
"So, even while invoking the provisions
of Article 227 of the Constitution, it is
provided that the High Court would
exercise such powers most sparingly and
only in appropriate cases in order to keep
the subordinate courts within the bounds
of their authority. The power of
superintendence exercised over the
subordinate courts and tribunals does not
imply that the High Court can intervene
in the judicial functions of the lower
judiciary. The independence of the
subordinate courts in the discharge of
their judicial functions is of paramount
importance, just as the independence of
the superior courts in the discharge of
their judicial functions. It is the members
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.157 of 2025 dt.31-01-2025
10/13
of the subordinate judiciary who directly
interact with the parties in the course of
proceedings of the case and therefore, it
is no less important that their
independence should be protected
effectively to the satisfaction of the
litigants."
(See also: Trimbak Gangadhar Telang &
Anr. Vs. Ramchandra Ganesh Bhide &
Ors.11; Mohd. Yunus Vs. Mohd.
Mustaqim & Ors.12 and State, New
Delhi Vs. Navjot Sandhu & Ors.13.)
7. Learned counsel reiterates that unless there is
any dereliction of duty on part of the subordinate courts, the
High Court should not interfere with the functioning of the
learned trial court in casual manner and no direction should be
given to the learned trial court merely on asking of the parties.
Learned senior counsel further submits that so far pending
applications are concerned, the learned trial court is at liberty to
take those applications as per its convenience and dispose of the
same without being directed by this Court as there is no
allegation that the learned trial court is not proceeding in the
matter showing promptness and has been unduly delaying the
matter.
8. By way of reply, learned counsel for the
petitioners that if the ex-parte injunction order was only till
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.157 of 2025 dt.31-01-2025
11/13
appearance of defendant nos. 1 and 10, there was no need for
them to file the application on 18.11.2021 for recalling of the
ex-parte order. Even after passing of injunction order on
18.01.2021
, the defendant nos. 1 and 10 have executed
altogether 12 registered sale deeds in favour of different
persons. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners
have approached this Court only with a prayer for disposal of
applications of plaintiffs along with with application filed by
defendant nos. 1 and 10 and they have not prayed for any relief
for expeditious disposal of the main suit and as such there is no
occasion for bringing on record the order sheet of the details of
the adjournment.
9. Having regards to the facts and circumstances
and submissions of the parties, this Court would like to make it
clear that this Court, under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India, has not passed any order interfering with the functioning
of the learned trial court. However, it is much apparent that if
certain applications are pending since 2020 and these
applications are not being taken up for hearing or disposed of, it
would naturally result in delay in the disposal of the main matter
and any prudent person would agree with it. Expeditious
disposal of civil cases are in the interest of all involved and also
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.157 of 2025 dt.31-01-2025
as a matter of public policy delay in disposal of civil cases
should be avoided as it erodes the faith of general public in
justice dispensation system. In this background orders are
passed by this Court exercising power and jurisdiction under
Article 227 and order dated 09.01.2025 in Civil Miscellaneous
No. 04 of 2025 has been passed in similar manner.
10. From perusal of the record and submissions
of the parties, it appears that the injunction petition filed under
Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the
petitioners dated 12.03.2020 is still pending. Similarly, petition
dated 1811.2021 filed by defendant nos. 1 and 10 is also
pending. Thereafter, several applications have been filed as
mentioned in the instant petition. Without going into further
details, the learned trial court is directed to take up the
applications which have been filed in the year 2020 and 2021
for expeditious disposal, considering the antiquity of the
applications, strictly in accordance with law. Thereafter, other
applications would be taken up by the learned trial court for
disposal in accordance with law and as per its convenience as
and when these applications are pressed by the respective
parties. The order dated 09.01.2025 passed in Civil
Miscellaneous No. 04 of 2025 will be read in consonance with
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.157 of 2025 dt.31-01-2025
these directions.
11. With the aforesaid direction, the present petition
stands disposed of.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
DKS/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 07.02.2025
Transmission Date NA
