Dismissed

Arvind Kumar Tiwari v. Gajanandrao Salunke dead

Chhattisgarh HC4 Jan 2016WP227/1087/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh disposed of the writ petition as withdrawn. The court reserved liberty for the petitioners to file a detailed application seeking to implead a necessary party and directed the trial court to decide that application afresh.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of as withdrawn; liberty reserved to file detailed application for impleading necessary party; trial court directed to decide afresh.

Arvind Kumar Tiwari Vs Gajanandrao… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Chhattisgarh HC (2016)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

WP227 No. 1087 of 2015

¶4

Arvind Kumar Tiwari S/o Mahavir Prasad Tiwari, aged about 55 years, R/o Dabripara, Behind Santosh Bhuwan, Bilaspur, Tahsil & District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.............Plantiff

¶5

Anil Kumar Tiwari S/o Mahavir Prasad Tiwari, aged about 47 years, R/o Dabripara, Behind Santosh Bhuwan, Bilaspur, Tahsil & District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ...............Plantiff

¶6

---- Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

Gajanandrao Salunke (Dead)

¶9

Sudhakar Rao S/o Gajanand Rao Salunke, R/o Near Mahila Thana Masanganj, Bilaspur, Tahsil & District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ..............Defendant

¶10

Smt. Sushila Salunke W/o Late Gajanand Salunke, aged about 76 years, R/o Masanganj, Near Mahila Thana, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh...............Defendant

¶11

Prabhakar Salunke S/o Late Gajanand Salunke, aged about 58 years, R/o Masanganj, Near Mahila Thana, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh...............Defendant

¶12

Smt. Shobha Kosle W/o Shri Ravikant Kosle, aged about 45 years, D/o Late Gajanand Salunke, R/o Masanganj, Near Mahila Thana, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ....................Defendant

¶13

Smt. Harjinder Kaur W/o Gyansingh, aged about 45 years, R/o Ward No.4, Nagar Panchayat Bodri, Tahsil Bilha, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ........................Defendant

¶14

---- Respondents

¶15

For Petitioners – Shri Parag Kotecha, Advocate. For Respondents – None, not noticed.

¶16

Hon'ble Shri Justice Chandra Bhushan Bajpai

¶17

Order On Board

¶18

04/01/2016

¶19

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners prayed that he may be permitted to file a detailed and exhaustive application under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in brevity ‘the Code’) and the Court below may, after hearing the parties, appreciate the entire facts for the prayer that non-applicant/proposed defendant No.5

¶20

Harjinder is a necessary party; learned counsel for the petitioners further prayed that the impugned order dated 03-12-2015 may not come in the way for the appreciation of the said application as bonafidely they left with certain facts and pleadings which are relevant for the prayer earlier made therein.

¶21

On due consideration, the instant WP(227) is disposed of as withdrawn reserving the aforesaid liberty as prayed on behalf of the petitioners. The petitioners may file a fresh detailed and exhaustive application under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 of the Code and after due opportunity to proposed defendant and other defendants the Court below is directed to decide the said application afresh. Needless to mention that impugned order

¶22

dated 03-12-2015 shall not come in the way.

¶23

With these observations, the petition disposed of.

¶24

No order as to cost.

¶25

Sd/(Chandra Bhushan Bajpai) JUDGE

¶26

Aadil

Arvind Kumar Tiwari v. Gajanandrao Salunke dead

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind Kumar Tiwari v. Gajanandrao Salunke dead

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pramod Patel @ Baba Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Mohammad Nijam Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Neeraj Katghar And Ors. Vs Mahamaya Pratap Singh And Ors.

Lalan Prasad Vs Smt. Purna Kumari

Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs Roshan

Krishna Kumar Sahu Vs Smt. Janki Sahu