High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/157/2021dismissed

Ram Kumar Agrawal (Advocate) v. Virsingh Sonwani

2021-01-19Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 157 of 2021 • Ram Kumar Agrawal (Advocate) S/o Shri Beni Prasad Agrawal Aged About 76 Years R/o Behind Kabibada, Ward No. 01, Shankar Nagar, Mahasamund Tahsil And District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Virsingh Sonwani S/o Siyandas Sonwani Aged About 68 Years R/o Behind Kabibada, Ward No. 01 Shankar Nagar, Mahasamund, Tahsil And District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

2. Court Of Tahsildar Mahasamund, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh Through Tahsildar.

3. Court Of Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Mahasamund District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. Through Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue)

4. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Ram Kumar Agrawal, Petitioner in person For Respondent/ State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 19.01.2021 Heard.

1. Petitioner would submit that by order dated 05.10.2019 on an application at the behest of Respondent No. 1, the order under section 250 of Land Revenue Code was passed for dispossession of the petitioner, though the petitioner is the owner of the land bearing Khasra No. 444/ 6 whereas the respondent No. 1 was not the owner at any time. He would further submit that in a Civil Court though Respondent No. 1 claimed to have purchased the said land but he could not produce the sale deed. He further submits

that against the order dated 05.10.2019, the petitioner had preferred an appeal before the SDO which has been dismissed by order dated 11.12.2020 on the ground of limitation whereas limitation has been wrongly counted.

2. Perused the documents.

3. In any case against the order passed by the SDO, a second appeal shall lie under Section 44 (2) (i) of the C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959. The instant petition is not maintainable.

4. The petition being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge Jyoti