In a strong rebuke to what it called a “gross abuse of judicial and administrative power,” the Allahabad High Court has ordered immediate restoration of possession of an ancestral house to a woman who was forcibly evicted along with her three minor children. The court also directed disciplinary action against a judicial officer and imposed ₹1 lakh compensation for the illegal dispossession.
The judgment was delivered by a Division Bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Arun Kumar in a writ petition filed by Smt. Soni.
Background of the Case
The dispute relates to a joint ancestral property in Siddharth Nagar district, originally owned by the petitioner’s father-in-law. After his death, the property devolved upon multiple family members, including the petitioner’s husband and other co-sharers. No formal partition of the house ever took place.
Read also:- Supreme Court Rejects NAK Engineering’s Impleadment Plea in Long-Running Mumbai Service Charges Suit
The petitioner had been residing in the house with her children and was running a small beauty parlour from one of the ground-floor shops, which she described as her only source of livelihood.
The controversy began when a court employee purchased a small undivided portion of the house through a sale deed executed by two co-sharers. Claiming possession, he filed a civil suit for permanent injunction and obtained an ex parte interim order from the trial court.
What Triggered the Writ Petition
Despite the injunction being purely prohibitory in nature, revenue and police officials formed a joint team and forcibly evicted the petitioner on July 18, 2025. Her belongings were thrown out, her shop was shut, and she was briefly detained along with her children while possession was handed over to the purchaser.
The petitioner maintained that she had never been served with summons in the civil suit and came to know of the injunction only at the time of eviction. After repeated but unsuccessful representations to district authorities, she approached the High Court.
Read also:- Madhya Pradesh HC Backs Biological Father's Right, Orders School to Add His Name in Child’s Academic Records
Court’s Observations
The High Court found serious procedural lapses at every stage. It noted that the trial court granted an ex parte injunction without verifying possession and later passed an order under Section 151 of the CPC on the very same day the application was filed, without notice or hearing.
“The manner in which the proceedings were conducted leaves it unclear whether this was ignorance of law or something more,” the Bench observed.
The court also held that administrative authorities had no jurisdiction to execute a prohibitory injunction by forcibly delivering possession.
“This amounted to colourable exercise of power and gross abuse of administrative authority,” the judges said.
Read also:- Supreme Court Restores ₹3.73 Lakh Compensation in Driver Death Case, Overturns Telangana HC Order
Significantly, the court pointed out contradictions in the purchaser’s own claims regarding possession and noted that even police reports admitted he was never in actual possession of the property.
Court Decision
Allowing the writ petition, the High Court passed a series of strict directions:
- The State authorities were ordered to restore possession of the house to the petitioner and other co-sharers within 48 hours.
- The matter was directed to be placed before the Chief Justice for considering disciplinary action against the Civil Judge (Junior Division) who passed the order dated February 5, 2025.
- The conduct of the purchaser, a district court employee, was ordered to be examined by the competent authority.
- The court awarded ₹1,00,000 as compensation to the petitioner for illegal dispossession and mental trauma, to be paid within one week, failing which recovery proceedings were directed.
With these directions, the writ petition was disposed of.
Case Title: Smt. Soni vs State of Uttar Pradesh & Others
Case Number: Writ – C No. 28263 of 2025
