Patna High Court
ARVIND KUMARversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE Director General of Police (DGP) Govt. Of Bihar, Patna
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- JITENDRA KUMAR
Holding
The writ court cannot decide the disputed title and the petition is disposed, directing the parties to seek interim relief in the pending civil suit.
Summary
The petitioner, an advocate, filed a writ petition seeking peaceful possession of his official chamber, alleging that his brother Ashok Kumar had installed a double lock with the help of 'bad elements' on 29-10-2020, thereby hampering his legal practice. The petitioner claimed ownership of the premises by gift from his aunt, while Ashok Kumar and his wife Vandana Kumari contended that the property belonged to them, having purchased it from a relative. The matter of title is already before a competent civil court (Title Suit No. 341 of 2019), where Ashok Kumar is a defendant. The High Court observed that a writ court cannot adjudicate disputed title matters and directed the parties to pursue relief in the pending civil suit, allowing the petitioner to file an interlocutory application for removal of the double lock. The court ordered that any such application be filed within fifteen days, with a reply from the respondents within a week, and the civil court to dispose of it within a month. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of, with liberty granted to seek interim relief in the civil proceedings.
Issues considered
- Can the High Court entertain a writ petition for possession when the title of the property is disputed and a civil suit is pending?
- Whether the writ court can decide on the factual dispute of ownership between the parties
- Appropriate interim relief for the petitioner pending determination of title
Subjects
- writ petition
- civil suit
- title dispute
- interim relief
- possession
- advocate's office
- double lock
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.330 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- District- Patna
======================================================
Arvind Kumar, Advocate, S/o Late Govind Das, R/o Mohalla- Guzri Bazar,
P.S.- Khejekalan, Patna City, Anchal Patna Sadar, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar Through The Director General of Police (DGP) Govt. Of
Bihar, Patna, Bihar
2. The District Magistrate, Patna, Bihar
3. The Chief Executive Officer, Patna Municipal Corporation Patna, Bihar
4. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna, Bihar
5. The Deputy Superintendent of Police Patna City, Bihar
6. The Sub Divisional Officer Patna City, Bihar
7. The Officer-in-Charge P.S.- Khajekalan, Patna City, Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sheo Shankar Prasad, SC-8
For the PMC : Mr. Yashraj Bardhan, Advocate
Mr. Abhimanyu Kumar Tripathi, Advocate
Mr. Rananjay Kumar, Advocate
For the Intervenor : Mr. Jagjit Roshan, Advocate
Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
5 06-01-2026 This writ petition has been filed for peaceful
possession of the Official Chamber/Residential Office of the
petitioner, who happens to be an advocate and his practice is
being hampered on account of all the files being confined in the
premises. The double lock has been put up by Ashok Kumar, the
brother of the petitioner with the help of bad elements on
29.10.2020.
2. Learned counsel on behalf of Ashok Kumar and his
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.330 of 2021(5) dt.06-01-2026
2/3
wife/Vandana Kumari is also present in the Court and he has
already filed one intervener application to get impleaded as
respondents in this writ petition, because as per his submission,
the property belongs to Vandana Kumari, wife of Ashok Kumar
and he is submitting that Vandana Kumari has purchased the
property from the brother of her husband viz., Awadh Kumar.
3. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, the
property absolutely belongs to the petitioner which is gifted by
his fua viz., Yasoda Devi.
4. It is also informed by both the parties that the
petitioner has already moved competent Civil Court by way of
filing Title Suit No. 341 of 2019, pending in the Court of Sub-
Judge-I, Patna City in which Ashok Kumar is already defendant.
5. I heard both the parties and perused the materials
on record.
6. It clearly transpires from the record that the
property, which is being claimed as property of the petitioner, is
being disputed by Ashok Kumar and his wife/Vandana Kumari
and Civil Suit is already pending before the competent Court for
declaring the Title and other ancillary relief. It is also settled law
that Writ Court cannot decide the disputed facts of Title of the
rival parties.
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.330 of 2021(5) dt.06-01-2026
3/3
7. Hence, in such facts and circumstances, it is
desirable that both the parties should pursue their case before
the Civil Court where Suit is pending and for immediate relief,
the petitioner is at liberty to file one Interlocutory Application
before the Civil Court where Title Suit is pending between the
parties for interim relief by way of removing double lock by
Ashok Kumar or his wife/Vandana Kumari. If such application
is filed by the petitioner within fifteen days, Ashok Kumar or his
wife/Vandana Kumari, who is present herein by way of her
Advocate, is also directed to file his or her reply to interlocutory
application within one week and thereafter, Civil Court
concerned is directed to dispose of the application in any
situation within a month from the date of filing of the
application, because the Official Chamber/Residential Office of
the petitioner is being claimed as Office of Advocate and his
practice is being hampered.
8. With such aforesaid observations, the present
petition is disposed of with liberty to the parties as sought for.
(Jitendra Kumar, J.)
ravishankar/-
U T
Checking your session…