PARWATI DEVI vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - ASHOK KR YADAV — WPC/3123/2026
Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 04th May 2026.
CNR: JHHC010113882026
Filing Number
WPC/3996/2026
Filing Date
07-Apr-2026
Registration No
WPC/3123/2026
Registration Date
28-Apr-2026
Judge
Sri Ananda Sen, J.
Coram
Sri Ananda Sen, J.
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
LAND REVENUE , TENANCY & NAZUL ( 146 )
Sub-Category
Cnt Act ( 28 )
Judicial Branch
Civil Section
Decision Date
04-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Off
Last updated 04-Jun-2026
Petitioner(s)
-
1.PARWATI DEVI
Adv. NILENDU KUMAR,RAJ LAKSHMI SHARMA,RAJ LAKSHMI SHARMA, ,BIKRAM KUMAR SAH,RAJ LAKSHMI SHARMA
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - ASHOK KR YADAV
-
2.THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER-CUM-DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, LATEHAR
-
3.THE SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, LATEHAR
-
4.BODHI GANJHU
-
5.MAHENDRA GANJHU
-
6.VIJAY GANJHU
-
7.BAJRANGI GANJHU
-
8.PRAMESHWAR GANJHU
-
9.DHARMENDRA GANJHU
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
04-May-2026
Sri Ananda Sen, J.View PDF
Case Summary: WPC/3123/2026 Court Decision: The Jharkhand High Court dismissed Parwati Devi's writ petition, upholding the Revenue Authorities' decision that a title dispute cannot be resolved under Section 71 of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act. The court directed her to file a civil suit to establish her ownership rights and recover possession of the disputed land. Key Reasoning: The court found no illegality in the Revenue Authorities' direction and held that since the dispute involves establishing chain of title and ownership—matters requiring detailed examination of documentary evidence—the civil court is the appropriate forum for adjudication. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
29-Apr-2026
Lawazima
Registrar (Judicial)
-
07-Apr-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WPC/3123/2026
Case Summary: WPC/3123/2026 Court Decision: The Jharkhand High Court dismissed Parwati Devi's writ petition, upholding the Revenue Authorities' decision that a title dispute cannot be resolved under Section 71 of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act. The court directed her to file a civil suit to establish her ownership rights and recover possession of the disputed land. Key Reasoning: The court found no illegality in the Revenue Authorities' direction and held that since the dispute involves establishing chain of title and ownership—matters requiring detailed examination of documentary evidence—the civil court is the appropriate forum for adjudication. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts