The bench dismissed a civil miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of an order closing plaintiffs’ evidence, holding that sufficient opportunity was provided and the Deputy Commissioner was eventually impleaded as per statutory requirements.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 98 of 2020
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
For the Petitioners : Mr. Sandeep Verma, Advocate For the Opp. Parties :
Oral Order
05/ Dated : 03.11.2022
Instant petition has been filed for quashing of order dated 28.01.2019 by which plaintiffs/petitioners’ petition to recall the order dated 21.05.2018 which was passed for closing the evidence of plaintiffs, has been rejected.
(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J . )
Anit
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay in impleading the Deputy Commissioner after remand warrants quashing the order closing the plaintiffs’ evidence.
Whether sufficient opportunity was granted to the plaintiffs for leading evidence.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Gazo Mahto
Shankar Mahto
Milu Mahto
Jogeshwar Mahato
Gautam Kumar Choudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
