Dismissed

Bindeshwar Rai v. Achidanand Rai and Ors.

Patna HC1 Oct 2018C.Misc./1242/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judicial officer dismissed an appeal against an order allowing the amendment of a plaint. The officer held that amendment hearings are not the appropriate stage to adjudicate merits or issues like res judicata, especially when defendants are absent.

What did the court decide?

The Civil Miscellaneous appeal filed against the order allowing amendment of plaint was dismissed.

Bindeshwar Rai Vs Achidanand Rai and Ors. — Partition | Patna HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.1242 of 2018

¶2

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

¶3

Bindeshwar Rai, S/o Dhanautar Rai, Resident of Village- Mallikpur, P.S.Raghopur, P.O.- Mohanpur, District- Vaishali.

¶4

.... .... Appellant/s Versus

¶5

Achidanand Rai,

¶6

Shyam Ray,

¶7

Rakesh Kumar,

¶8

Nawal Kishore Rai, All S/o Late Damodar Rai,

¶9

Nagendra Rai,

¶10

Mukesh Rai, Both S/o Late Jawahar Rai, All are resident of VillageMallikpur, P.O.- Raghopur, P.S.- Raghopur, Dist- Vaishali.

¶11

Sheo Shankar Rai,

¶12

Ashok Rai, Both Sons of Late Danautar Rai, Both resident of VillageMallikpur, P.O. & P.S.- Raghopur, District- Vaishali.

¶13

Nirmala Devi, D/o Late Dayanand Rai, Resident of Village- Beyapur, P.S.- Maner, District- Patna.

¶14

Deo Sunder Devi, W/o Late Chandradeep Rai, Resident of VillagePurakasara, P.O.- Kachchi Dargah, P.S.- Didarganj, District- Patna.

¶15

Parmanand Rai, S/o Late Damodar Rai, Resident of Village- Mallikpur, P.S.- Raghopur, P.O.- Mohanpur, District- Vaishali.

¶16

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

¶17

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Chandan Kumar Verma For the Respondent/s : Mr.

¶18

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

¶19

2 01-10-2018 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶20

The petitioner has filed this Civil Misc. petition against the order dated 21.06.2018 passed in Title Suit No. 1072 of 2016 whereby the learned Sub Judge-IV, Vaishali at Hajipur allowed the amendment petition of the plaintiffs.

¶21

The petitioner is the defendant 1^st set. The plaintiffs

¶22

wanted to insert in the plaint that ancestor of the plaintiffs

¶23

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.1242 of 2018 (2) dt.01-10-2018

¶24

2/2

¶25

compromised Title Suit No. 14 of 1985 and plaintiffs wanted to insert this fact in the plaint and the same was allowed.

¶26

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the judgement and decree passed in Title Suit No. 14 of 1985 suffers from res judicata but the learned court below did not give any finding on this point and allowed the amendment petition.

¶27

Admittedly the suit is pending for appearance of many of the defendants. At the time of amendment of plaint the court is not at all required to deal with the merit of the amendment sought for and, thus, I find that the learned Sub Judge has rightly allowed the amendment petition. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in this Civil Misc. petition and the same is dismissed.

¶28

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)

¶29

BKS/-

¶30

Bindeshwar Rai v. Achidanand Rai and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bindeshwar Rai v. Achidanand Rai 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

Ashok Sao Vs The State Of Bihar

Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Manoj Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Sahodra Devi Vs Malti Devi

Masjid Noor Mohammad Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ram Chandra Mahto Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.