In this second appeal, the Patna High Court held the appeal incompetent and dismissed it for default as it was barred against certain necessary parties, who were excluded from the statutory bar created for respondent Nos.
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.
Patna High Court SA No.297 of 1996 (14) dt.07-12-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Second Appeal No.297 of 1996
14 07-12-2016
====================================================== Anup Devi .... .... Appellant/s Versus Madan Singh & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Akhileshwar Pd. Singh Mr. Anil Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. Gauri Shankar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. NATH ORAL ORDER Mr. Akhileshwar Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, in response to the office note that this appeal has stood dismissed for default as against respondent Nos. 2 to 7 and 9 to 13, has submitted that those respondents are necessary parties to this appeal.
In view of the fact that this appeal has stood dismissed for default against those respondents, this appeal has now become incompetent and is dismissed as such.
(V. Nath, J.)
Snkumar/-
U
Anup Devi
Madan Singh
V. Nath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
