Delhi High Court Orders Litigant Claiming Ownership of Territory Between Ganga and Yamuna from Agra to Gurugram to Pay ₹10,000 in Costs

Case: KUNWAR MAHENDER DHWAJ PRASAD SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA

Coram: Justice Subramonium Prasad

Case No.: W.P.(C) 11198/2023

Court Observation: “This Court is of the opinion that the writ petition is completely misconceived. The claims raised by the Petitioner in the present Writ Petition cannot be gone into or adjudicated in a writ petition,”

“The judgments, extracts from Wikipedia report, documents of political integration of India, Instrument of Accession also do not substantiate the case of the Petitioner,”

“In view of the above, this Court is inclined to dismiss the writ petition by imposing costs of Rs.10,000/- on the Petitioner. Let the costs be deposited by the Petitioner with the Armed Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund within a period of four weeks from today.”

“Writ courts cannot enter into a field of investigation which is more appropriate for the Civil Court in a properly contested suit. Questions of fact which require determination, where rival claims of the parties have to be decided, which are purely factual, can be adjudicated in a properly instituted suit and the proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not the proper remedy,”

Previous Posts

AP High Court overturns a troubling conviction under the NDPS Act, stating that it was unfair to place the burden on the accused to prove they did not own the cultivated land

High Court Grants Bail to Two Individuals, While One Faces Denial in Rahul Solanki Murder Case Related to Delhi Riots

Delhi High Court Clarifies that Contempt for ‘Wilful’ Disobedience Excludes Casual or Bona Fide Acts and Does Not Encompass Negligent Actions

Mandatory Notice Under Municipalities Act Waived in Title Declaration and Permanent Injunction Suit Against Town Municipal Council: Karnataka High Court

If there’s a delay in carrying out a detention order without a clear explanation, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court suggests it casts doubt on whether the detaining authority was genuinely satisfied

Keywords

Delhi High Court Orders Litigant