MP High Court Orders Removal Of Encroachments From Indore's Khajrana Land Within 30 Days

Indore bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed authorities to remove encroachments, if any, from a disputed plot in Khajrana and hand over possession to M/s Ram Builder, preferably within 30 days of receiving a certified copy of the order.

Justice Sandeep N Bhatt passed the order on October 27 while disposing of contempt petition and deciding connected writ petitions concerning land measuring 0.720 hectare in Survey No 66/2(k), Village Khajrana.

The company had purchased the land through a registered sale deed dated March 31, 2003, and its name was subsequently entered in revenue records. A demarcation conducted in January 2017 revealed encroachments. The Tehsildar ordered restoration of possession on June 25, 2018, and the orders were upheld by the appellate authorities.

The High Court and its division bench also ruled in the company’s favour. On October 25, 2023, the division bench directed removal of encroachments with police assistance and handover of vacant possession within 45 days of receipt of the certified copy. The Supreme Court subsequently dismissed a special leave petition in June 2024, according to the order.

The dispute resurfaced after five writ petitions challenged proposed eviction and coercive action. The court observed that the petitioners failed to establish valid title or lawful possession. It noted that sale agreements do not confer ownership, mutation entries are not proof of title, some sale deeds lacked survey details or were executed by third parties, and no sanctioned building plans or permissions were produced.

The court also found that administrative orders dated March 11, 2024, had misinterpreted earlier judicial directions and were illegal and arbitrary.

Allowing petition filed by the original owner, the court set aside the March 11 orders and dismissed the five other writ petitions. It described the subsequent litigation as an abuse of process and emphasised the constitutional right to property.

The court disposed of the contempt petition by directing authorities to implement the earlier order expeditiously. Two other contempt petitions were dismissed as nothing further survived.