SONARAM HANSDA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND
LAWS(JHAR)-2004-10-20
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on October 29,2004

Sonaram Hansda Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

TAPEN SEN, J. - (1.) HEARD the parties.
(2.) THE Petitioner in the instant case prays interalia for an appropriate order restraining the Respondents from setting the Tank situated on Khata No. 169 Plot Nos. 67 -68 under Mauza Hamsada commonly known as 'Hamsada Bandh '. He further makes a prayer that this order should be delisted from the list of Tanks to be settled for financial year 2002 -03 as he has apprehensions that the same would be settled and included in the said list vide serial No. 20 thereof. The Petitioner has further made a prayer that the concerned Circle Officer be directed to fix rent of the Tank so that he may be able to pay rent to the State. According to the Petitioner, he is a Scheduled Tribe and the aforementioned Tank situated on Khata No. 169, Plot No. 67 -68 under Mauza Hamsada was constructed by the father of the Petitioner in the year 1956. After his death, the Petitioner inherited it but during the time of preparation of settlement records, it wrongly came to be recorded in the name of the State. He was at that time, a minor but later on, he filed Title Suit No. 54/1987 and by judgment dated 9.8.1988 (Annexure -4), the Suit was decreed and his title over the suit property was declared and confirmed, holding that he had permanent raiyati right and that the State - Defendants had acquired no right, title, interest or possession over the same. The said property fell comprised as under : Mauza C.S. Khata No. R.S. Khata No. C.S. Plot No. R.S. Plot No. Area Hamsada P.S. Chandil 47 169 1/500 67 68 2.20 Decimals 03 Decimals A Photocopy of the certified copy of the Judgment has been brought on record vide Annexure -4 appended to the Writ Petition.
(3.) THE petitioner has stated that after the aforementioned judgment had been delivered, the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Saraikella Kharsawan at Seraikella (Respondent No. 3) wrote a letter to the Circle Officer Chandil wherein, he informed him that the Petitioner had produced a copy of the Judgment delivered in Title Suit No. 54/1987. Accordingly, he directed, that as per the Judgment rendered therein, the Circle Officer was to take steps for fixation of rent. This is a document that proves that at least in the year 1993, the Respondents had become aware of the Judgment passed in Title Suit No. 54/1987.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.