R.K.MERATHIA, J. - (1.) MR . Sunil Kumar Sinha, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that on the request of respondent No. 4, who happens to be the own brother of the petitioner, the Electricity Board has threatened disconnection of the electric connection being D -39C/D -4197, in the premises of the petitioner.
(2.) MR . Prashant Pallav, appearing for respondent No. 4 (R -4) submitted that the said electrical connection stands in the name of R -4, who is the owner of the premises in question, and he has got every right to surrender the said connection, as R -4 wants to make construction as per the sanctioned plan and without disconnection of the electric line, he is not in a position to make any construction. He further submitted that respondent No. 4 was prosecuted on the ground that he made construction in violation of the sanctioned map. He further submitted that R -4 is in part possession of the premises. In reply, Mr. S.K. Sinha disputed that R -4 is in part possession. He submitted that a suit being Title Suit No. 200 of 2000 was filed and against the dismissal of the same, Title Appeal No. 40 of 2007 is pending, in the Court of the learned Judicial Commissioner Ranchi.
(3.) THUS it appears that there is a dispute between the petitioner and R -4 with regard to right, title, interest and possession over the property in question. At least, it prima facie appears that the petitioner is in occupation of the premises in question, may be partly.;