Dismissed

Ram Pravesh Sahu Alias Ram Prakash Sahu and Anr. v. Kaleshwar Sahu and Ors.

Jharkhand HC6 Jan 2016WPC/1270/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition challenging the rejection of an application to exhibit documents in a pending title appeal, the Single Judge dismissed the petition. The Court found no infirmity in the order since the documents were never pleaded in the written statement and the application was filed nine years after the title suit was instituted. The writ petition was dismissed accordingly.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition seeking quashing of the order rejecting the application to exhibit documents is dismissed.

Ram Pravesh Sahu Alias Ram Prakash Sahu and Anr. Vs… — Property and Title | Jharkhand HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 1270 of 2015

¶3

Ram Pravesh Sahu @ Ram Prakash Sahu, son of Late Anirudh Sahu

¶4

Pradeep Kumar Sahu, son of Shri Ram Pravesh Sahu Both residents of Village-Nari Nawadih, P.O.-Nawadih, P.S.Kisko, District-Lohardaga ... … Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

Kaleshwar Sahu

¶7

Basant Sahu

¶8

Both sons of Bhola Sahu, residents of Village-Nari Nawadih, P.O.-Nawadih, P.S.-Kisko, District-Lohardaga 3. Santa Devi, daughter of Late Bhola Sahu and wife of Bahura Sao, resident of Village-Chandkopa, P.O. & P.S.- Senha, DistrictLohardaga … … Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

¶10

For the Petitioners : Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate For the Respondents :

¶11

11/06.01.2016 Seeking quashing of order dated 27.09.2012 in Title Appeal No. 16 of 2003 whereby, application seeking permission to exhibit documents has been rejected, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶12

2. The petitioners were defendant nos. 2 and 4 in Partition Suit No. 13 of 1990. The suit was instituted by Kaleshwar Sahu, Basant Sahu and Santa Devi for a preliminary decree for partition claiming 3/5^th share in the Schedule-A properties and for a declaration that the gift-deed dated 25.06.1990 executed by defendant no. 1 in favour of defendant no. 4 with respect to Schedule-B property was illegal, fraudulent and null and void. The defendant nos. 1, 2 and 4 filed common written statement taking a plea of previous partition in the year, 1935. It was asserted that the defendant nos. 1 and 2 were regularly paying rent to the State of Bihar in respect of the land allotted in their share and they were cultivating the same. The defendant no. 1 had no issue and he had special love and

¶13

¶14

affection for defendant no. 4 who is grand-son of own brother of defendant no. 1. The defendant no. 1 executed gift-deed dated 25.06.1990 in favour of defendant no. 4. The partition suit was decreed vide judgment and order dated 29.05.2000 declaring that the plaintiffs are entitled for 1/4^th share in the suit land and the defendant no. 2 is also entitled for 1/4^th share. The gift-deed dated 25.06.1990 was declared illegal and null and void. The said order was challenged before this Court in First Appeal No. 73 of 2000(R) however, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn and Title Appeal No. 16 of 2003 was instituted. In the pending title appeal application dated 04.09.2012 was filed for exhibiting certain documents.

¶15

3. A perusal of the written statement filed on behalf of defendant nos. 1, 2 and 4 would disclose that there was no foundation laid for adducing evidence on the basis of the documents mentioned in application dated 04.09.2012. In the said application the appellant has mentioned registered-deeds dated 10.02.1941, 03.03.1948 and 24.07.1936 besides, several other documents. There is no whisper about these documents in the written statement filed on their behalf. The judgment in Partition Suit No. 13 of 1990 does not disclose that the defendants raised a plea based on the documents mentioned in application dated 04.09.2012. The said application was filed 9 years after the institution of Title Appeal No. 16 of 2003.

¶16

4. Considering the aforesaid facts, I find no infirmity in the impugned order dated 27.09.2012 and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

¶17

(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.)

¶18

Manish

Ram Pravesh Sahu Alias Ram Prakash Sahu and Anr. v. Kaleshwar Sahu and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Pravesh Sahu Alias Ram Prakash Sahu and Anr. v. Kaleshwar Sahu and Ors.

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

Vijay Kumar Mandal Alias Vijay Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Collector Deoghar and Ors.

Yogendra Kumar Shyam Vs Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas

Central Coalfields Limited through Its General Manager Cum Project Officer Sri Ram Vinay Singh Vs Mines and Geology

Sri Tatanagar Goushala through Its Honorary Joint Secretary Sri Shrawan Kumar Debuka Vs Animal Husbandary Department

Phulena Singh Vs the Central Bank of India through Its Authorised Officer and Anr.

Shanti Kumar Saraf Vs Home Department