Dismissed

Tabassum Hayat and Ors. v. Shama Hayat and Ors.

Patna HC29 Nov 2017C.Misc./686/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged the Sub Judge's order dismissing their amendment petition to incorporate moveable property in a title partition suit. The court held that without documents showing the defendants' possession of such properties, the sub-judge's order could not be termed illegal, and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The civil miscellaneous petition was dismissed; the lower court's order was not quashed.

Tabassum Hayat and Ors. Vs Shama Hayat and Ors. — Partition | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.686 of 2016 (7) dt.29-11-2017 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.686 of 2016

¶3

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

¶4

Tabassum Hayat W/o Md. Shahabuddin and D/o late Md. Abbas Resident of Mohalla- Madanpur, P.O. +P.S.- Madanpur, DistrictAurangabad(Bihar).

¶5

Shabnam Hayat W/o Md. Meraj

¶6

Nilofer Hayat W/o Md. Parvez Both are Daughters of late Md. Abbas, Resident of Mohalla- Qazi tola, P.O. +P.S. - Ara, District- Bhojpur.

¶7

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus

¶8

Shama Hayat W/o Md. Iqbal , D/o Late Md. Abbas

¶9

--Principal-Defendant-Respondent

¶10

Md. Shahzad S/o late Md. Abbas Both are Resident of Mohalla- Imalital, P.O. Danapur Cantt, P.S. Danapur, District- Patna.

¶11

.... .... Defendant-Respondent/s

¶12

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

¶13

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Shailesh Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr.

¶14

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

¶15

7 29-11-2017 Heard both sides.

¶16

The petitioners have filed this civil miscellaneous petition against the order dated 09.06.2016 passed by Sub Judge I, Danapur in Title Partition Suit No.96 of 2015 by which the amendment petition of the petitioners incorporating the moveable property has been dismissed.

¶17

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the plaintiff seeks permission to amend the plaint by incorporating the moveable property. It is submitted that all those properties were purchased and in possession of the defendant but there is no

¶18

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.686 of 2016 (7) dt.29-11-2017 2

¶19

chit of paper on record to show that any moveable joint family properties which are given in the petition are in possession of the defendants. Unless there is document to show that the defendants are in possession of such moveable property which was purchased from the joint family fund, it cannot be said that the order passed by the learned Sub Judge is illegal order.

¶20

Accordingly, this civil miscellaneous petition is

¶21

dismissed.

¶22

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)

¶23

Saurabh/-

¶24

U T

Tabassum Hayat and Ors. v. Shama Hayat and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tabassum Hayat and Ors. v. Shama Hayat and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sudhir Kumar Sah Vs Gorabh Patel and Ors.

Sri Nath Thakur Vs Raju Thakur and Ors.

Abu Biswas and Anr. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Gajendra Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Dharmendra Kumar Albela andORS Vs The Central Bureau Of Investigation Through Addl. Superintendent Of Police Cbi/acb Patna

Rabindra Nath Sinha Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.