MD.JALIL ALIAS JALI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application relates to the properly being double storeyed building, standing on Plot No. 62 Khata No. 24, situated in Village -Karha, Police Station Sadar. District Hazaribagh. The petitioner, who claims to have right and title over the property, in question, prays for a direction on respondents to restore his possession with entire articles and the property, with further prayer to direct the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioner.

(2.) THE main grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No. 2, Anchal Adhikari, Hazaribagh, respondent No. 3 Officer -in -charge, Sadar. Hazaribagh and respondent No. 4. Circle Officer, Hazaribagh Anchal. Hazaribagh, without any jurisdiction, illegally evicted the petitioner from the building premises and threw away the belongings of the family members. It is alleged that such action on the part of the State authorities is arbitrary, that too at the stage when a dispute between the two private individuals is pending consideration before a civil Court of competent jurisdiction.

(3.) THE vendors of the petitioner Arati Das along with the petitioner seem to have earlier preferred Title Suit No. 37 of 1997 in the Court of learned Subordinate Judge -I, Hazaribagh, wherein, it is claimed that the premises in question (suit property) was obtained by one Chapla Devi, in pursuance of an auction sale, held on 18th May, 1949 in Certificate case No. 229/M/48 -49, who also purchased adjacent plots. She subsequently constructed a Pucca double storeyed residential building upon portion of Plot No. 62, besides the out - houses over Plot Nos. 63 and 64 and later on gifted the plots in favour of one Shishir Kumar Das, by registered deed of gift dated 9th August, 1972. After death of Shishir Kumar Das, it vested with the plaintiffs No. 1 to 3 from whom the petitioner purchased the suit property. The said case is stated to be still pending, wherein, a declara - tion has been sought for that the sale deed, executed by one Layeeque Alam in favour of other defendants, is illegal, void and inoperative, with a further declaration that defendants No. 3 to 7 of the said suit have not acquired any right, title, interest or possession.