Radhe Shyam Puranmalka v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3946 of 2019 ====================================================== Radhe Shyam Puranmalka, Son of Late Prahlad Roy Puranmalka, Resident of Mohalla- Bara Bazar, Katihar P.S. and District Katihar, presently residing at 1368, Hunter Circle, Naperville, ILLINOIS60540, United States of America. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through its Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Principal Secretary, Department of Registration and Excise, Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Inspector General of Registration and Excise, Bihar, Patna. 4.

District Magistrate, Katihar.

5.

The Registering officer, District Registration Officer, Katihar. 6.

Shyam Sundar Purnamalka, Son of Late Babulal Puranmalka, Residing at Shiv Mandir Chowk, Bara Bazar, Karihar, P.S. and District Katihar. 7.

Sher Mohammad, Son of Late Maulvi Imajuddin, resident of Village Dumariya, P.S. Amdabad, District- Katihar.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar Maharaj For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Vivek Prasad (Gp7) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 28-02-2019 Heard the parties.

The petitioner has filed the present writ application for quashing the sale deed No. 21114 dated 16.12.2010 executed by Respondent No. 6 in favour of Respondent No. 7. The petitioner has further prayed for directing the Respondent nos. 4 and 5 to look into the matter and to take necessary action with respect to illegal registration of the landed property of the petitioner.

The matter relates to civil dispute and the grievance of

Patna High Court CWJC No.3946 of 2019(2) dt.28-02-2019 2/2 the petitioner can only be redressed by the Civil Court with a competent jurisdiction. The petitioner has sought for quashing the sale deed in question.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner is directed to prefer a suit before the Civil Court with a competent jurisdiction as the same cannot be decided under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

With the aforesaid observation/direction, the present writ application stands disposed of.

(Sudhir Singh, J) Pankaj/- U