Nasir Khan And Others vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

Vishal Mishra, J

This petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:-

"i. That, this Hon’ble court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus and direct the respondent no.-2 to take action as per the provision of section 310 of M.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 and demolish the house of petitioner, which is in dilapidated condition and not fit for the residential or commercial activities.

ii That, this Hon’ble Court may further be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and direct the respondent no.-

2 to demolish the house of petitioner and recover the cost of demolishing proceedings to the petitioners as per the provision of section 310 (2) of M.P. Municipal Corporation Act, and the petitioners are ready pay the same.

iii. That, any other writ direction order as may be deemed fit in the circumstances may also be awarded along with the cost of litigation."

The facts leading to this petition, in brief, are that the petitioners are the owners of Sheet No.-7, Plot No.-93/9 situated at Deshbandhu Ward, Tikari Betul, Tehsil and Distt.- Betul (M.P.), in which the house of the petitioners was constructed by their father namely Peer Khan in his life time. A shop measuring 8 x 9=72 Sq. Ft. was situated at ground floor of the aforesaid house, which had been let out by the father of petitioners to the respondent no.-3- Rajendra Rathor about 25 years ago. As the said house is in a dilapidated condition, the Municipal Council, Betul issued notices under section 310 of the M.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 to demolish the house.

The respondent No.3, who is the tenant of the petitioners in the aforesaid shop, filed a Civil Suit No.267A/2017 seeking the relief of permanent injunction against the mother of petitioners and the petitioners, which was decreed by the 3rd Civil Judge, Betul vide judgment and decree dated 25.09.2024 (Annexure P/3) restraining the petitioners to dispossess him from the shop in question. It was also directed by the Civil Court to remove the wall constructed in front of said shop. Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the Civil Court, petitioners filed MJC No.137/2025 before the District Court, which was dismissed on the ground of delay vide order dated 09.12.2025 (Annexure P/5) passed by the First Additional District Judge, Betul. The mother of petitioner namely Mehrunis died on 19.08.2025. The present petitioners against the said order of the Appellate Court, preferred a second appeal before this Court bearing Second Appeal No.3482/2025 but the same has also been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 06.02.2026 (Annexure P/6). The respondent no.3 is pursuing proceedings before the trial court for execution of the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court. The case of the petitioners is further that the house of the petitioners in which the rented shop is situated is in dilapidated condition and therefore the possession of the shop cannot be given as the Municipal Council, Betul has issued notices to the petitioners to demolish the same.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has drawn attention of this Court to the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court i.e. 3rd Civil Judge (Junior Division), Betul dated 25.09.2024 (Annexure P/3) in Civil Suit bearing No.RCS-A267/2017 wherein it has been observed as under:-

A perusal of the record shows that the first appeal and second appeal preferred against the said judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court have been dismissed being time barred vide order dated 09.12.2025 and 06.02.2026 respectively. Now the petitioners are bound by the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court, which has been affirmed upto the second appeal.

Now the Municipal Council, Betul is issuing notices to the petitioners for demolition of the property in question as the same being in dilapidated condition, failing to do so, coercive action to the extent of registration of FIR will be taken against the petitioners. The fact remains that the petitioners are now bound by the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court.

During the course of arguments, a statement has been made by the learned counsel for the petitioners before this Court that the petitioners are ready to hand over the possession of the property in question to the respondent No.3. The notices issued by the respondent No.2-Municipal Council, Betul could not be complied with by the petitioners as there is already a judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court. The executing Court is also bound by the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court and cannot travel beyond the observations and findings recorded by the Civil Court.

Under these circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this petition on the statement made by the counsel for the petitioners that they are ready to hand over the possession of the property in question to the respondent No.3. In case, the respondent No.3 is not willing to take possession of the property in question, the petitioners to vacate the premises and inform the executing Court regarding the same and also communicate the information to the Municipal Council, Betul, so that it may take subsequent action.

Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of in above terms.