Partly allowed

State Bank of India v. Rajendra Prasad Poddar And Anr.

Jharkhand HC4 Apr 2019FA/129/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed two first appeals filed by State Bank of India and New India Assurance Co. Ltd. as withdrawn by the appellants, following the respondent's consent. No consequential relief was granted.

What did the court decide?

Dismissal of first appeals filed by State Bank of India and New India Assurance Co. Ltd. as withdrawn; return of lower court records.

State Bank of India Vs Rajendra Prasad… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

F.A. No. 129 of 2008

¶3

State Bank of India, a Body Corporate and duly constituted under its statute having its Head Office at Express Towers, Nariman Point, Mumbai and its Branches amongst other places at Bazar Branch, at Daltonganj, At P.O. & P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau

¶4

… … … Appellant (Principal Defendant No. 1 in Court below) Versus

¶5

1.Rajendra Prasad Poddar (deleted vide order dated 03/04/19)

¶6

Jagdish Prasad Poddar

¶7

Both sons of Late Sitaram Poddar, residents of Dharamshala Road, PO & PS Daltongunj District Palamau

¶8

… … (Plaintiffs in court below) 3. The Executive Engineer, Jharkhand (Formerly Bihar) State Electricity Board AT P.O. & P.S. Daltongunj Dist. Palamau

¶9

The Branch Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. At, P.O. & P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau

¶10

… … (Principal Defendant No. 2 & 3 in court below) 5. The Branch Manager, Bihar State Financial Corporation Nasheman Vila, Jail Compound At P.O. & P.S. Daltonganj, Dist. Palamau

¶11

The Managing Director, Ranchi Industrial Area Development Authority, Main Road, Ranchi.

¶12

The Technical Manager, Ranchi Industrial Area Development Authority, At P.O. Sudna PS Daltonganj Dist. Palamau

¶13

…. … (Proforma Defendants in court below) … Respondent(s)

¶14

With

¶15

F.A. No. 53 of 2009

¶16

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. having its office at PO & PS Daltongunj, Dist. Palamau represented through the Divisional Manager of Divisional Office at Laxmi Market, Old H B Road, Ranchi, Jharkhand … Defendant No. 3/Appellant

¶17

Versus

¶18

Rajendra Prasad Poddar (deleted vide order dated 03/04/19) 2. Jagdish Prasad Poddar

¶19

Both son of late Sitaram Poddar residence of village Dharamshala Road, PO & PS Daltongunj District Palamau by caste Marwari and by profession business

¶20

… … Plaintiff (s)/in court below

¶21

The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Bazar Branch Daltongunj at PO & PS Daltongunj, District Palamau

¶22

The Executive Engineer, Jharkhand (Formerly Bihar) State Electricity Board AT PO & PS Daltongunj Dist. Palamau

¶23

… … Principal Defendant No. 1 & 2/in court below

¶24

The Branch Manager, Bihar State Financial Corporation NashemVila Jail Compound At and PO & PS Daltongunj, Dist. Palamau

¶25

The Managing Director, Ranchi Industrial Area Development Authority, Main Road, Ranchi.

¶26

The Technical Manager, Ranchi Industrial Area Development Authority, At PO Sudna PS Daltongunj Dist. Palamau

¶27

…. … Performa Defendant No. 4 to 6 in court below … Respondent(s)

¶28

¶29

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

¶30

--For the Appellant : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate Mr. M.K. Sinha, Advocate Mr. K.L. Ojha, Advocate Mr. Sunita Ojha, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Manjul Prasad, Senior Advocate Mr. Arbind Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Baban Prasad, Advocate Mr. Praveen Kumar Verma, Advocate

¶31

¶32

14/04.04.2019

¶33

These two first appeals arises out of common award dated 17^th March, 2008 (decree sealed and signed on 28.03.2008) by Shri Chandra Bhushan Singh, Subordinate Judge-I, Palamau at Daltonganj in Title Suit No. 117 of 2002.

¶34

Counsel for the appellants in both these cases submits that so far as account of the surviving plaintiff with the appellant is concerned, the same has already been closed and the impugned judgment and decree has been passed only for a declaration that the plaintiffs suffered loss and damage due to deficiency in service committed by principal defendant nos. 1 to 3 in Rehabilitation of the unit of the plaintiffs and also for the cost of the suit. He submits that there is neither any consequential relief prayed for nor any consequential relief has been granted by the learned court below in the title suit. They further submit that there is no pending litigation between the

¶35

parties apart from this case. Counsel submits that as the account of the plaintiffs has already been closed, therefore, nothing survives in these appeals. Accordingly, they seek permission to withdraw these appeals.

¶36

Counsel for the surviving respondent/plaintiff has no objection to the prayer made by the counsel for the appellants.

¶37

Accordingly, these two appeals are dismissed as withdrawn.

¶38

Office is directed to send back the lower court records.

¶39

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

¶40

Binit/

State Bank of India v. Rajendra Prasad Poddar And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Rajendra Prasad Poddar And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Binod Kumar Singh Vs Dr Ganga Dayal Singh and Ors.

West Bokaro Colliery, Tisco Vs Rathwa Ganjhu And Ors.

Tisco Vs Jodhan Sao And Ors.

Sumitra Devi Vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

The New India Assurance Co.Ltd Vs Rajendra Prasad Poddar And Ors.

Fertilizer Corporation of Indi Vs M/S.Balaji Laminating Works