Patna High CourtL.P.A/376/2014dismissed

Ramchandra Sah v. Jasoda Devi And ORS

2016-07-26Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah,Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.376 of 2014 Arising out of Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 6541 of 1998 =========================================================== Ram Chandra Sah Son Of Late Bechu Sah Resident Of Village - Paharpur, P.S. Mahua, Distt. - Vaishali .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

1. Jaso Devi

2. Lal Pari Devi W/O Late Sukha Rai @ Sukhdeo Rai

3. Devendra Rai

4. Dilip Kumar Rai

5. Rama Nand Rai Sons Of Late Sukha Rai @ Sukhdeo Rai

6. Maula Devi

7. Lalti Devi Daughter Of Late Sukha Rai @ Sukhdeo Rai

8. Jogindra Rai

9. Harbansh Rai Sons Of Janak Rai

10. Ramji Rai S/O Sakhit Rai

11. Ram Chandra Rai

12. Ram Das Rai Sons Of Satya Narain Rai All Resident Of Village - Paharpur, P.S. Mahua, Distt. - Vaishali

13. The State Of Bihar

14. The Joint Director Of Consolidation, Bihar, Patna

15. The Deputy Director Of Consolidation, Vaishali At Hazipur

16. The Consolidation Officer, Mahua, Vaishali

17. Ram Jiwan Sah S/O Late Bachu Sah

18. Jailal Sah Son Of Bhagwat Sah All Resident Of Village - Paharpur, P.S. Mahua, Distt. - Vaishali .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad Sinha, Advocate. For the Respondent/s :

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA) Date: 26-07-2016

Patna High Court LPA No.376 of 2014 dt.26-07-2016 2/2 The challenge in the present Letters Patent Appeal is to an interim order passed in Interlocutory Application No. 346 of 2014 whereby an application filed by the appellant for restraining the writ petitioners from selling the land was dismissed for the reason that the appellant can approach the appropriate Civil Court seeking injunction in accordance with law.

The argument of learned counsel for the appellant is that the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is barred, therefore, the finding given by the learned Single Bench is incorrect. However, we find that any sale during the pendency of the writ application would be subject to the doctrine of lis pendens and will not affect the right of the appellant.

In view thereof, we do not find any reason to interfere in the present Letters Patent Appeal and is accordingly, dismissed. (Hemant Gupta, J) (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) P. Kumar/Ravi U