2026:JHHC:17424 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 702 of 2023 ------- Santosh Khetan, aged about 59 years, son of Late G. L. Agarwal, resident of 50, Aditya Garden, Tata Kandra Road, Adityapur, P.O.-Industrial Area, Adityapur, P.S.-Adityapur, District-Seraikela Kharsawan. .... Petitioner(s). Versus 1. Indian Overseas Bank, having its local office at Silver Cage Mall, 1st Floor, 10 Diagonal Road, Town Jamshedpur, P.O. & P.S.-Bistupur, District-East Singhbhum; through its Authorized Officer-cum-Chief Manager; 2. Authorized Officer-cum-Chief Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, having its local office at Silver Cage Mall, 1st Floor, 10 Diagonal Road, Town Jamshedpur, P.O. & P.S.-Bistupur, District-East Singhbhum; 3. State of Jharkhand, through the Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur, Town-Jamshedpur, P.O-Sakchi, P.S.-Sakchi, District-East Singhbhum; 4. Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur, Town-Jamshedpur, P.O.-Sakchi, P.S.-Sakchi, District-East Singhbhum; 5. Sub Divisional Officer, Dhalbhum, Town-Jamshedpur, P.O.-Sakchi, P.S- Sakchi, District-East Singhbhum. … Respondents. ------- CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.K. Rashidi, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Aditya Raman, AC to GA-III ------ 08/ 16.06.2026: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner’s grievance is that though the petitioner had purchased the flat in auction but the possession of the same was not delivered to him. Thus, he prayed that the physical possession of the property i.e. Flat No.A/012, Ground Floor, Acacia Block, Ashiana Garden Sonari, Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum having super built-up area of 1116 sq. ft. be handed over to him. 3. During pendency of this writ petition, today it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that that the flat has been handed over to the petitioner but only on 21.04.2025. 4. Thus, from the aforesaid submission, it is clear that the grievance of the petitioner, which he has prayed for ventilation in this writ petitioner has already been redressed. 5. Considering the said submission, this writ petition is dismissed as the same has become infructuous. I.A. No.4368 of 2026 6. This Interlocutory Application has been filed for amendment in the prayer portion of this writ petition, wherein the petitioner prays for compensation/ mesne profits quantified at Rs.22,70,735/- by the bank for the delay of five years and three months in handing over the property to the petitioner. 7. It is the case of the petitioner that since he could not enjoy the said property, thus he has suffered the loss and he has to be compensated. 8. From the prayers made in the main writ petition and in this Interlocutory Application, I find that the prayer, which the petitioner is seeking to incorporated by amendment, has got no nexus with the main prayer, which the petitioner has made in the writ petition. The same is absolutely a separate cause of action. 9. Further, the claim which the petitioner is trying to put forth through this Interlocutory Application, cannot be adjudicated in an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The claim of the petitioner needs to be proved by oral and documentary evidence as the same involves complicated question of facts. Thus, this Interlocutory Application cannot be allowed. 10. Accordingly, I.A. No.4368 of 2026 is dismissed. 11. Since the writ petition has become infructuous as the relief has already been granted to the petitioner, no order can be passed. If the petitioner wants to claim any compensation/ damages/ profits, it will be open to him to approach the Civil Court. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 16th June, 2026 Madhav/- Uploaded on:18/06/2026 -2-