IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.541 of 2010 ABHISHEK KUMAR SON OF SRI CHANDRABHAN PRASAD, RESIDENT MOHALLA MAKHDUMPUR, P.S. DIGHA, DISTRICT- PATNA Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. D.I.G. PATNA 3. S.P. PATNA 4. OFFICER INCHARGE OF DIGHA P.S. PATNA 5. R.D. SUBERNO SON OF K.C. SUBERNO RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO.4, ROAD NO.1, NEW PATLIPUTRA COLONY, P.S. PATLIPUTRA, DISTRICT- PATNA ----------- 5 30.03.2011 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, the State and the respondent no.5. A supplementary counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent no.5 and a reply to the same has also been filed on behalf of the petitioner. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the property in question has been purchased by the petitioner, and as such, petitioner has got the right, title and interest over the property in question. Learned counsel for the respondent no.5, on the contrary, claims the title and possession over the property. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that a civil suit has been filed with respect to the property in question. In view of the above, for agitating the claim with respect to the aforesaid dispute of title and possession, the writ proceeding is not an appropriate forum. However, it will be open for the parties to raise all their rights and contentions available to them under the law in the suit itself. The writ application accordingly stands disposed of. Manish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)