- (1.) Aggrieved by order dated 22.05.2015 in Title Suit No. 278 of 2007 whereby, application under Section 39 of the Specific Relief Act r/w Section 151 CPC has been dismissed, the present writ petition has been filed.
(2.) The petitioners assert that by a registered deed of permanent settlement (Kabuliyatnama) executed in the year, 1934 the land in D.B. Plot No. 1 was permanently settled in the name of Prabhulal Pranjivan Pathak by Manbhum District Board. The said settlement was in lieu of Salami of Rs. 5,000/- and annul rent. The said Prabhulal Pranjivan Pathak executed a registered sale deed of permanent settlement in the year, 1934 itself in favour of Hari Shankar Worah, Kripa Shankar Worah and Narbheram G. Chanchani who entered in possession over D.B. Plot No. 1. Subsequently, two massive buildings were constructed over D.B. Plot No. 1 which are known as "Jora Bungalows" in Dhanbad. The petitioners claimed assessment by Dhanbad municipality and payment of municipal tax by Narbheram G. Chanchani. In the writ petition the petitioners have pleaded various facts to assert that land in D.B. Plot No. 1 was validly acquired by the aforesaid persons. The said Narbheram G. Chanchani sold a portion of D.B. Plot No. 1 to the petitioner nos. 1 to 3 and father of petitioner nos. 4 & 5 through three separate registered deeds of conveyance. A notice for encroachment was issued by the Executive Engineer P.W.D, Road Division, Dhanbad however, the said notice was withdrawn on 01.09.1993. Vide letter dated 31.08.2005, the Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Dhanbad Zila Parishad issued notice claiming that Raj Kamal Mansion is standing over encroached land. The petitioners were compelled to institute Title Suit No. 278 of 2007 for declaration of confirmation of their title. During the pendency of the suit the petitioners were dispossessed on 09.04.2011. Subsequently, an amendment application was filed which was allowed. The petitioners seeking recovery of possession filed application dated 12.09.2013 which has been dismissed by the impugned order dated 22.05.2015.
(3.) Mr. Jaydeep Sen, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that 70 years after the possession of the petitioners over the suit property, a notice was issued by the Deputy Commissioner claiming that they have constructed house over the encroached land and though, Title Suit No. 278 of 2007 was already instituted, the petitioners were illegally dispossessed from the suit property. It is stated that the order of rejection dated 22.05.2015 is based on incorrect assumption of facts and appreciation of law. In this regard the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that to uphold the majesty of law possession of the property should have been restored to the petitioners.;