P GIRDHARAN PRASAD MISSIR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution to quash the entire land acquisition proceeding. No. 23 of 1959-60 of Champaran Collectorate, the award given on the 24th, July, 1962, and the delivery of possession made in favour of respondent No. 2, and for other consequential reliefs.

(2.) The disputed plots are plots Nos. 449 and 447 of khata no. 29, tauji no. 951, of village Narapur, Police station Begaha. in the district of Champaran.

(3.) The recorded tenants of the two plots were some Ahirs who had usufructuarily mortgaged them with one Bindbasini Sao who assigned the mortgage in favour of Ganga Devi Sugar Mills, The said Mills sold the mill along with the lands to respondent No. 2, the North Bihar Sugar Mills, sometime in 1950. Thus respondent No. 2 is the successor-in-interest of the original usufructuary mortgagee. The petitioners purchased the equity of redemption from the mortgagors sometime in 1936. and thus became the mortgagors of the property. In Title suit no. 186 of 1947 brought by the petitioners in the Court of the Munsif of Bettiah, a decree was obtained and the Court directed delivery of possession of the disputed lands to the petitioners. An appeal against the Munsif's Judgment was dismissed by the Additional Subordinate Judge of Motihari. Thereupon respondent No. 2 filed a second appeal, No. 669 of 1958. in the High Court. and that appeal was disposed of on the 20th February, 1962, (Annexure E), by Ah-mad, J., who, while affirming the judgments of the lower courts, gave further extension of time for a period of three months for giving up delivery of possession of plot no. 449 to the plaintiff. Though both the plots mentioned above were in dispute, the real controversy was as regards plot no. 449, on which alone some of the machinery of the sugar mill, such as chimney, spray pond, etc., had been installed. So far as plot no. 447 is concerned, it was urged by respondent No. 2 that it was in the possession of the petitioners until it was duly delivered to respondent No. 2 on the 27th. August, 1962. This fact is not admitted by the petitioners. It is unnecessary to discuss this point at length as nothing turns on it. This plot is said to be a mere sugarcane field with no structures or machineries standing on the same.