CLIENT COUNSELING - 1

Personal Details:

1. Name – Santosh Kumar Singh

2. Age – 44
3. Address – Ram Bharti Ganj, P.O. Sasaram, Rohtas – 821115.
4. Occupation – Agriculture (Farmer)
5. Contact No. – 8084381681
6. Other Family Details – Santosh Kumar Singh is a married person. He has three children (2
sons and 1 daughter). The eldest son is Aryan Raj aged thirteen; her daughter named Ayushi
Kumari is five years old and his youngest son aged two years old.
7. Aadhar Card Number – 4014 7428 0803

General Grievance:

1. Nature of Problem – Land Dispute

2. Facts – The client claims to own a Khatiani plot of land at Sasaram, Bihar. He had the
khatian records and the electricity bill comes in the name of his brother. He was dispossessed
of the same land without his knowledge. The details of the plot – C.S. Plot No. 256, Sasaram.
The client claims that the land was owned by his ancestors, one of whom he names Dhikari
Mahto.

In 1997, a person named Prahalad Dubey along with others claimed ownership of the same
land and on the other hand the Sasaram Municipality also made a claim over the same plot of
land i.e. Plot No. 256. A case was filed by Prahalad Dubey in which our client was not made
a party to the suit. The suit was decided in favour of the petitioner i.e. Prahalad Dubey in the
year 2012. At this time too, our client was not aware of any of the developments in relation to
this suit.

In 2018, an interlocutory application was also filed with respect to this land without making
our client, a party to the suit, which was then dismissed. After some time period, our client
 comes to know about all the fiasco in relation to his land. Post which, he is now seeking legal
remedies.

3. Details of the case – CWJC/3059/1997 (In the High Court of Judicature at Patna);
MJC/884/2016 (In the High Court of Judicature at Patna)

4. Central Point of Dispute – The owner of the land (our client) has been dispossessed of the
same through court proceedings between two other parties and our client is in total ignorance
of the same. After he taking cognizance of the whole matter, seeks legal remedy to put him in
the same position as he earlier was.

5. Relief to be claimed or Purpose of Client’s visit – The client wants the respective land back
from which he was dispossessed and that too in the same condition as it was earlier i.e. free
and clear of any already done construction on the disputed land.

Issue of Law

Whether an order passed in CWJC/3059/1997, suppressing the fact, shall be binding upon our
client who were not made party to the respective writ petition. How this order, which has been
passed in 2012, would be set aside?

Information collated by Aman Gupta and Amol Verma.