TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 1705
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a at Ernakulam in Writ Petition (C) No. 15385/2017 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court allowed the writ petition filed by Respondent No. 1 herein and directed the Appellant herein, by issuing a writ of mandamus, to restore the possession of the flat in question to Respondent No. 1 herein. 3. Facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. They, however, need mention in brief infra to appreciate the short question involved in this appeal. 4. The dispute essentially relates to the possession of a flat bearing No. 3D, 3rd floor located in building known as Royal Court-Block IV at Kozhikode (hereinafter referred to as "the flat") and is between the Appellant and Respondent No. 1 herein. 5. Respondent No. 1 filed a writ petition being W.P....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e writ petition filed by Respondent No. 1 herein out of which this appeal arises. 10. In our considered opinion, the writ petition filed by the Respondent No. 1 Under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India against the Appellant before the High Court for grant of relief of restoration of the possession of the flat in question was not maintainable and the same ought to have been dismissed in limine as being not maintainable. In other words, the High Court ought to have declined to entertain the writ petition in exercise of extra ordinary jurisdiction Under Article 226/227 of Constitution for grant of reliefs claimed therein. 11. It is not in dispute that the reliefs for which the writ petition was filed by Respondent No. 1 herein agai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 15. It has been consistently held by this Court that a regular suit is the appropriate remedy for settlement of the disputes relating to property rights between the private persons. The remedy Under Article 226 of the Constitution shall not be available except where violation of some statutory duty on the part of statutory authority is alleged. In such cases, the Court has jurisdiction to issue appropriate directions to the authority concerned. It is held that the High Court cannot allow its constitutional jurisdiction to be used for deciding disputes, for which remedies under the general law, civil or criminal are available. This Court has held that it is not intended to replace the ordinary remedies by way of a civil suit or application....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t has proceeded to decide the writ petition on admitted facts. 20. We do not agree with the submissions of learned Counsel for Respondent No. 1 for the reasons that first there did exist a dispute between the Appellant and Respondent No. 1 as to who was in possession of the flat in question at the relevant time; Second, a dispute regarding possession of the said flat between the two private individuals could be decided only by the Civil Court in civil suit or by the Criminal Court in Section 145 Code of Criminal Procedure proceedings but not in the writ petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution. 21. In view of the foregoing discussion, we are unable to agree with the reasoning and the conclusion arrived at by the High Court in the im....