AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R. K. Merathia
As prayed, defects are ignored.
Heard Mr. R.P. Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Ayush Aditya, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 2 - Bhagwati Devi.
Mr. Gupta submitted that on 8.7.2010 when W.P.(C) No. 4511 of 2006 was disposed of, it could not be pointed out by the petitioners that the matter was transferred by the Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum to the Additional Collector and therefore, he had jurisdiction to pass order. He further submitted that even if it is accepted that the Additional Collector had no power to pass the order, the matter could have been remitted to the Deputy Commissioner and therefore, the said order may be recalled and the matter may be remitted to the Deputy Commissioner.
On the other hand, Mr. Ayush Aditya submitted that as per the said order, the petitioners have already filed a suit being Title Suit No. 139 of 2010 in the court of Sub-Judge I, Jamshedpur and the petitioners are always at liberty to raise all the points available to them in the suit.
On this, Mr. Gupta submitted that had the petitioners been able to point out the aforesaid position, the matter could have been remitted either to the Deputy Commissioner or the opposite party. Respondent no. 2 might have been asked to file suit, but in view of the order passed by this Court, the petitioner has filed suit.
In the circumstances, it is clarified that the orders passed by the revenue authorities and the said order dated 8.7.20120 passed in W.P.(C) No. 4511 of 2006 will not prejudice the parties on merits in the suit.
In my opinion, the order under review is not required to be interfered with as ultimately the disputes between the parties are required to be decided by the competent court of civil jurisdiction.
In the circumstances, this civil review is disposed of with the observations as aforesaid.