Allowed

Deo Nath Rai and Ors. v. Nawal Rai and Ors.

Patna HC27 Nov 2017C.Misc./536/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court allowed a civil miscellaneous application. The Court set aside the lower court's order rejecting a petition to recall a witness (Deonath Rai) to prove two sale deeds already on record, finding a jurisdictional error in the lower court's dismissal of the application based on delay.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 12.04.2016 is set aside and the plaintiff is directed to examine Deonath Rai for proving two sale deeds already on record.

Deo Nath Rai and Ors. Vs Nawal Rai and Ors. — Property and Title | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.536 of 2016 (4) dt.27-11-2017 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.536 of 2016

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Deo Nath Rai, Son of Late Kabilas Rai.

¶5

Subash Kumar @ Subash Kumar Yadav.

¶6

Arbind Kumar

¶7

Both Sons of Deo Nath Rai alive.

¶8

Nirmala Devi

¶9

Srimala Devi @ Seema Devi

¶10

Sunita Devi nos. 4 to 6 Daughters of Deo Nath Rai alive. All residents of Village: Chakahan, P.O. Shamkauriya, P.S. Isuapur, District: Saran.

¶11

.... .... Plaintiffs/Petitioners Versus

¶12

Nawal Rai.

¶13

Pramod Rai

¶14

Munna Rai

¶15

Sons of Late Nath Saran Rai, Residents of Village: Chakahan, P.O. Shamkauriya, P.S. Isuapur, District: Saran.

¶16

.... .... Defendants/Respondents

¶17

====================================================== Appearance :

¶18

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Nagendra Rai For the Respondent/s : Mr.

¶19

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA

¶20

ORAL ORDER

¶21

4 27-11-2017 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶22

Nobody appears on behalf of the respondents.

¶23

The petitioners have filed this civil miscellaneous application against the order dated 12.04.2016 in Title Suit No.53 of 2011 by which learned Munsif IV, Chapra rejected the petition for recalling Deonath Rai to prove two sale deeds and to mark the sale deeds as exhibits, which are already on record, only on the ground that the petition was filed after much delay.

¶24

It appears that the documents sought to be exhibited in

¶25

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.536 of 2016 (4) dt.27-11-2017 2

¶26

the suit were filed after framing of the issues and prior to hearing of the suit but on account of inadvertence, those documents were not exhibited while Deonath Rai was being examined. Therefore, I find that the learned Munsif has committed jurisdictional error in rejecting the petition of the petitioner for recalling the witness to prove those two sale deeds which are on record from before.

¶27

Accordingly, the order dated 12.04.2016 is set aside with a direction to the Munsif 4^th , Chapra to allow the plaintiff to examine Deonath Rai for proving two sale deeds which are already on record.

¶28

The civil miscellaneous application is accordingly

¶29

allowed.

¶30

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)

¶31

Saurabh/-

¶32

U T

Deo Nath Rai and Ors. v. Nawal Rai and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deo Nath Rai and Ors. v. Nawal Rai 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

Sudhir Kumar Thakur and Anr. Vs Lakshmi Devi and Ors.

Arvind Kumar @ Munna Kumar @ Arabind Kumar Vs Chintu Kumar and Ors.

Urmila Devi Vs Rupkali Devi and Ors.

Pramila Devi Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Kiran Devi Vs Dharamvir Kumar @ Ganesh Kumar

Vijay Kumar Raut Vs Baleshwar Mahto and Ors.