Dismissed

Bacho Mandal, v. Mihir Kumar

Patna HC5 Nov 2018C.Misc./756/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an oral order in a civil miscellaneous petition challenging the dismissal of an application under Order I Rule 10 CPC to implead the petitioner as a defendant in a land title suit. The High Court upheld the lower court's dismissal because the petitioner failed to prove his ancestor's ownership of the land through required documentary evidence.

What did the court decide?

The civil miscellaneous petition filed by the appellant was dismissed in the interest of justice.

Bacho Mandal, Vs Mihir Kumar — Property and Title | Patna HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.756 of 2018

¶2

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

¶3

Bacho Mandal

¶4

Mihir Kumar & Ors

¶5

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

¶6

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Gupta For the Respondent/s : Mr.

¶7

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

¶8

2 05-11-2018 It is submitted that the name of Mr. Devi Das Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, has wrongly been printed in the daily cause list as Mr. Devi Das Srivastava has not signed the Vakalatnama for the petitioner.

¶9

Let the name of Mr. Devi Das Srivastava shall not appear in the daily cause list.

¶10

Heard the learned for the petitioner.

¶11

The petitioner has filed this Civil Misc. petition against the order dated 21.03.2018 passed by learned Sub JudgeXIII, Bhagalpur in Title Suit No. 621 of 2013 by which the learned Sub Judge dismissed the petition of the petitioner filed under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for being impleaded as defendant in the suit.

¶12

The plaintiff filed the suit for declaration of title, confirmation of possession and for correction in entry of records.

¶13

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.756 of 2018 (2) dt.05-11-2018

¶14

2/2

¶15

Admittedly, the land was recorded in the name of State of Bihar and name of ancestors of the plaintiff was recorded in remark column as Awaidh Dakhalkar . During the pendency of the suit, the intervener filed petition claiming that the land was settled in the name of his ancestors by the ex-landlord through unregistered Hukmnama but no chit of paper or any subsequent facts showing mutation in the name of ancestors of petitioner in the record of rights was filed. I find that the learned Sub Judge has rightly dismissed the petition of the petitioner on the ground that petitioner did not file any paper showing that the land belonged to his ancestor.

¶16

Having considered the facts aforesaid, I do not find any merit in this Civil Misc. petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶17

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)

¶18

BKS/-

¶19

Bacho Mandal, v. Mihir Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bacho Mandal, v. Mihir Kumar

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

Shambhu Prasad Vs Resma Devi and Anr.

Bakeshwar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Dr. Uday Shankar Mishra and Anr. Vs Vijay Shankar Mishra and Ors.

Shanker Paswan Vs Noor Jahan

Narendra Prasad Vs Bijendra Singh and Ors.

Patwari Marandi and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.