LAWS(PAT)-2019-9-68

RAM KRISHNA PANDEY Vs. SUDARSAN GIRI

Decided On September 19, 2019
RAM KRISHNA PANDEY Appellant
V/S
Sudarsan Giri Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Respondent No.3 and 4, and learned counsel for the State.

(2.) This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner (Defendant No.3 before the trial Court) for setting aside the order dated 20.08.2018 passed by the Sub-Judge-IVth, Rohtas (Sasaram) in Title Suit No.139 of 2001 by which, he has rejected the amendment petition dated 29.06.2018 filed under Order-6, Rule17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short C.P.C.) as well as dismissed the suit.

(3.) Mr. Fulman Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that in the ceiling proceeding initiated by the Collector, Rohtas at Sasaram, 43.24 acres of village Murlipur and Sotwan Math was declared surplus, but as a matter of fact, the Schedule-A property mentioned in the suit is Khas and own property of the petitioner and respondent nos.8 to 13. He contended that the trial court erred in law to dismiss the suit as not maintainable as well as amendment petition of the petitioner. He contended that to file suit with regard to any land is a matter of right of the petitioner as Civil Court, is an original Court of fact. The trial Court ought not to have dismissed the suit on technical grounds. He pleaded that the Civil Court is empowered to declare the right, title and interest of the parties and in case, the order impugned is not set aside, the petitioner would suffer irreparable loss and injury.