IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No. 6279 of 2009
Manager Kuwar ... ....Petitioner
Versus
1. Rawari Devi
2. Shankar Kuwar
3. Tarni Kuwar
4. Najo Kuwar ...Respondents
---------
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D. N. PATEL
For the Petitioner : Mr. Amar Kumar Gupta, Advocate
For the Respondents :
———
st
04/ Dated: 31 March, 2010
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the photocopy of
judgment dated 16th December, 1980 in Criminal Miscellaneous Case
No. 936 of 1980 is not allowed to be presented in the trial court in Land
Acquisition Case No. 16 of 2005, preferred by the petitioner and therefore,
the present writ petition has been preferred against order dated 27th May,
2009 passed by the Sub Judge, LAR, Dumka.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner is grand son of the original owner of the land, in question and
therefore, he is entitled for compensation for the land acquired. Petitioner,
who is original plaintiff, wants to present before the trial court a
photocopy of the judgment delivered by the Sub Divisional Magistrate,
Dumka in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 936 of 1980 dated 16th
December, 1980. When this Court pointed out a query that how this
judgment is connected with the land acquisition case, he is unable to point
out any connection of the aforesaid criminal case with the land acquisition
case. He consumed more than twenty minutes in the open Court in turning
pages here and there and still he is unable to point out how the aforesaid
judgment in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 936 of 1980 dated 16th
December, 1980 is concerned with the land acquisition case, nor he is able
to point out that on which date he applied for certified copy and who
pointed out what to the petitioner. There is no reply from the concerned
criminal court that the original record is not available. Thus, learned
counsel for the petitioner has miserably failed in giving the casual
connection between land acquisition case and the criminal miscellaneous
2.
case judgment, nor he is able to point out for which order, the petitioner
has applied for the certified copy and what is the reply given by the
concerned authorities. In these sets of circumstances, I see no reason to
entertain this writ petition and the order passed by the trial court is
absolutely in consonance with the facts and law and therefore, there is no
reason to interfere with the order passed by the Sub Judge, LAR, Dumka
dated 27th May, 2009 in Land Acquisition Case No. 16 of 2005.
3. There is no substance in this writ petition, hence, the same is
hereby, dismissed.
(D.N. Patel, J)
VK/-