Dispute Regarding Right, Title, Interest And Possession Of Property Can't Be Decided In Writ Jurisdiction: Jharkhand HC

The Jharkhand High Court has held that dispute in connection with right, title, interest and possession with respect to the property cannot be decided in writ jurisdiction.

The Court was considering a Writ Petition seeking direction to the State Housing Board to not interfere in lawful possession of his plot.

The single-bench of Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary observed, "13. This Court finds that there is serious dispute in connection with right, title, interest and possession with respect to the property involved in the present case. 14. This Court is of the considered view that the status of Saroj Kumar- the original allottee cannot be decided in writ jurisdiction."

The Petitioner was represented by Advocate Dilip Kumar Prasad while the Respondent was represented by Advocate Surabhi.

The Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the allottee in connection with one plot and when she came to know that the plot was available for sale, she approached the Respondent No.-1 and got the name of the intending seller and contacted Respondent No.-2 for purchasing the land. His further case was that the Respondent No. 2 showed the death certificate of his father namely letter issued by the Executive Engineer recommending for transfer of name with regard to the plot in question. The order with regard to transfer of name fully satisfied the petitioner that his father was dead he had all the rights to deal with the property. Consequently, the Petitioner became ready to purchase the property. The Petitioner accrodingly purchased the Property after paying sale consideration and it was also registered in her name.

It is further case of the petitioner that suddenly in the month of December, when the petitioner was undertaking some construction over the property, the authorities of respondent no. 1 asked the petitioner to stop construction work and she received a letter of the Estate Officer of respondent no. 1 by which the petitioner was directed to hand over the registered deed so that the housing board could take steps for cancellation of such a deed. It was alleged in the said letter that a letter was written by father of Respondent No.2 that he was alive. He referred to Clause 16 of the Registered Deed to submit that any dispute is required to be resolved through arbitration which is to be referred to the managing director of the Housing Board. 

As per the Housing Board, it was revelaed that the person whom Respondent No.2 claimed to be dead was instead alive and was infact not even his father. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Housing Board submitted that by the impugned letter they had simply asked the petitioner to hand over the original registered deed which was in her possession so that they could take appropriate steps and the entire background of the matter has been mentioned in the impugned letter. She submitted that through this letter, the Housing Board had asked the petitioner either to surrender the deed or appropriate steps would be taken through Civil Court for cancellation of the deed.

The Court ruled that it cannot decide on issues pertaining to right, title, interest and possession with respect to property in a Writ Petition.

The Petition was accodingly dismissed.

Cause Title: Bimla Devi vs. Jharkhand State Housing Board

Appearances:

Petitioner- Advocate Dilip Kumar Prasad, Advocate Jitesh Kumar, Advocate Umesh Pathak,

Respondent- Advocate Surabhi, Amitesh Kumar Geasen, AC to AAG-IA, Advoacte Rajesh Kumar Tiwari, Advocate Shalini Saboo, Advocate Vishwanath Moon,

Click here to read/ download Order: