High Court at Ranchi rejected the appellant's submission to admit the second appeal for merits, holding that the trial court's factual findings were upheld without any substantial question of law being raised, resulting in dismissal at the admission stage.
The appeal was dismissed at the stage of admission itself.
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
S.A. No. 449 of 2017
Pradeep Kumar Gupta …… Appellant/Plaintiff
Versus
Kulwant Singh ……Respondent
----------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
-----
For the Appellant : Mr. Amar Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Respondent :
Order No.03/ Dated:05.12.2023
Heard learned counsel for the appellant on the point of admission of this appeal under Order XLI Rule 11 C.P.C.
misconception of law. He further pleaded that the learned court below did not appreciate the documentary and oral evidence adduced by the plaintiff/appellant. The plaintiff has rightly mentioned cause of action since March 1975 and corroborated with his witnesses but the learned trial court did not appreciate. He further pleaded that the learned court should have seen the tittle of the suit property but the learned trial court is silent on this point while the plaintiff has shown his title and ownership in respect of the suit property though his khatiyan, rent receipts and holding tax receipts etc., but even then the learned court below has decided the issue no. 5 against the plaintiff. The respondent did not show his title or title of Mostt. Gulbi. He has further argued that neither the defendant has proved this title nor Mostt. Gulbi. He further submits that issue nos. 4, 6 & 7 have also been wrongly decided against the plaintiff. The suit property recorded in the name of Ramswroop, Sitam Ram Halwai and Narayan Halwai in revisional survey, Ext.6, 2 to 2/K, Govt. rent receipt 3 to 3/C, C.C. of order-sheet of P.A. No. 5689 Ext.4, C.C. information slip Ext.7 & 8. The learned trial court has failed to appreciate the documents of the plaintiffs. There are sufficient grounds for success of this appeal on merits, hence, it may be admitted for hearing.
Both the court below on the basis of pleadings and evidence adduced by parties concurrently hold that defendant was neither a tenant nor the defendant is liable to be evicted from the suit properties. It was also hold by both the court below that the suit properties were recorded in the joint names of brothers and descendants of Ramswaroop Halwai and no reliable evidence has been adduced by the plaintiff to show that deceased plaintiff has filed the suit in the capacity of the karta of the joint
family, hence, no title can be declared only in the name of deceased plaintiff or his only son Pradeep Kumar Gupta. The court below has also hold that the suit property belong to Gulbi Devi’s husband as the Gulbi Devi had purchased the suit house in auction sale and Gulbi Devi sold the land to the defendants and other person.
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
Rajnish/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether this second appeal should be admitted for merits in the absence of a substantial question of law.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Pradeep Kumar Gupta
Kulwant Singh
Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
