BIMAN ROY vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — WPC/2130/2026

Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 06th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010164932026

Filing Number

WP227/9538/2026

Filing Date

22-Apr-2026

Registration No

WPC/2130/2026

Registration Date

29-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

ORDINARY CIVIL MATTERS ( 17 )

Sub-Category

OTHERS AND MIXED BAG ONES.. ( 1750 )

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Decision Date

06-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BIMAN ROY

    Adv. Tessy Abraham

  2. 2.Mr. Vivek Roy

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.

  2. 2.The Commissioner (Revenue)

  3. 3.The Tahasildar,

  4. 4.Mr. Samar Nayak

  5. 5.Mr. Vikas Nayak,

  6. 6.Nilesh Gupta,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

    SUMMARY The Chhattisgarh High Court directed the Revenue Commissioner to decide pending mutation/succession proceedings (Case No. 73-A-6/2018-19) within 30 days, finding the seven-year delay unjustified and prejudicial to petitioners' property rights. The court emphasized that prolonged pendency defeats parties' rights and causes litigation multiplicity, but expressly avoided ruling on the merits of the underlying succession dispute over late Smt. Sheela Roy's self-acquired properties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 01-May-2026

    For Orders [On Office Notes]

    Additional Registrar(j)

  4. 22-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPC/2130/2026

casestatus.in Summary

SUMMARY The Chhattisgarh High Court directed the Revenue Commissioner to decide pending mutation/succession proceedings (Case No. 73-A-6/2018-19) within 30 days, finding the seven-year delay unjustified and prejudicial to petitioners' property rights. The court emphasized that prolonged pendency defeats parties' rights and causes litigation multiplicity, but expressly avoided ruling on the merits of the underlying succession dispute over late Smt. Sheela Roy's self-acquired properties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case