PATNA, India, April 13 -- Patna High Court issued the following judgment on March 11:

1. The present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners seeking writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to get the house of the petitioners vacated which is situated at village - Baunsi, P.S. - Babubarhi, District - Madhubani bearing Khata No. 30 (old)/53(new), Khesra No. 364(old)/467(new), Khata No. 30(old)/94(new) and Khesra No. 364(old)/466(new) and vested with right and title in favour of the petitioners which has been illegally encroached upon by private Respondent No. 9/Raj Kumar Paswan. The petitioners are also seeking direction to the respondent authorities, particularly the officer-in-charge of Babubarhi Police Station to investigate the P.S. Case No. 05 of 2021 in a fair and impartial manner as respondent No. 9 has not only encroached the house of the petitioners, but has been even threatening them of dire consequences and police is not taking proper steps to ensure the safety of the petitioners.

2. In counter affidavit, filed by private respondent No. 9/Raj Kumar Paswan, it has been claimed that the possession of the house in question has been got by Private Respondent No. 9 from one Mithilesh Kumar Singh in pursuance of agreement for sale. But as per the claim of the petitioners, they have got the sale deed in regard to the house in question subsequently in the year, 2016 and 2019 and accordingly, they are claiming title to the property. Hence, this is a case of civil dispute regarding right and title in regard to the property in question. Therefore, this writ petition is not maintainable because only the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction can adjudicate the dispute between the parties.

3. Learned counsel for the State has also filed counter affidavit and submits that after proper investigation in Babubarhi P.S. Case No. 05 of 2021, lodged by the petitioners, charge-sheet has been submitted and even in counter FIR bearing Babubarhi P.S. Case No. 06 of 2021, charge-sheet has been submitted after proper investigation, filed by the wife of respondent No. 9 and if the petitioners have any grievance, they have liberty to file protest petition against the charge-sheet and closure of the case against some accused persons.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the private respondent No. 9.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have purchased the land in question from Jyoti Kumar Singh, Ashok Kumar Singh and Mithilesh Kumar Singh in the year, 2016 and 2019 and they got the possession of the land. However, subsequently, when the petitioners were away from the home, because petitioner No. 1 was a Block Development Officer in Naubatpur at Samastipur district and petitioner No. 2 was working as Station Superintendent at Samastipur district, private respondent No. 9 had taken advantage of their absence and they entered into the house of the petitioners in the year, 2019 itself. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed for eviction of private respondent No. 9 from the house of the petitioners.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that to get the house back, they have filed one application before the concerned Circle Officer, but respondent No. 9 did not appear. Hence, the petitioners were constrained to move this Court and they have also filed one criminal case bearing Babubarhi P.S. Case No. 05 of 2021.

7. I considered the submissions advanced by both the parties and perused the materials on record.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/viewjudgment/MTYjMTA0IzIwMjIjMSNO-X1j6kvDAHIU=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.