The High Court dismissed a Civil Miscellaneous application seeking to set aside an order allowing the addition of a brother as an additional plaintiff in a title suit. The Court held the trial court's decision was not illegal, perverse, or beyond jurisdiction.
The application under Article 227 was dismissed.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.211 of 2019
======================================================
Om Prakash @ Om Prakash Arya son of Late Tapasi Ram @ Tapashwi Ram Arya, resident of Purani Bazar Narkatiaganj, P.O.- Narkatiaganj, P.S.Shikarpur, District- West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner
... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Sunil Srivastava, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 05-04-2019
Heard.
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.211 of 2019 dt.05-04-2019 2/6
no.2 was quite vague and neither properly verified nor affidavited and has been filed at the instance of respondent no. 1 just to delay the disposal of the suit. On perusal of the statement made in paragraph-2 of the plaint, it would appear that respondent no.1 had filed the suit in the capacity of Karta and manager of his family. As such, there was no option for adding any other member of the family as plaintiff at the fag end of the suit. He has further contended that respondent no. 2 is neither a necessary party nor a proper party to the suit for adjudication of the issues involved in the suit as the respondent no.1 has filed the suit representing himself to be a co-sharer and there is no allegation that the respondent no.1 has gone in collusion with the petitioner.
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.211 of 2019 dt.05-04-2019 3/6
Katha 16 Dhur from Smt. Shakuntala Devi, wife of Gulabchand Rajgarhia vide registered sale deed no. 19392 dated 14.07.1974 in the name of petitioner's father as trustee and 5 Bigha 16 Katha from wife of Gulabchand Rajgarhia vide registered sale deed no.19283 dated 14.07.1974 in the name of petitioner's father as trustee and the entire land came in possession of father of respondent no.1.
(a) A decree be passed in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant with declaration that the sale deed no. 19283 in the name of deceased father of the defendant for 5B, 18K-16 Dhur in the name of the defendant as trustees total 10 Bigha 14 Katha 16 Dhurs being the suit lands were purchased by father of the plaintiff with right, title and possession of the plaintiff, the defendant and his father being trustees name lender.
(b) The Anchal Adhikari, Lauriya be ordered to transfer the jamabandi of the suit land in the name of the plaintiff from the name of the defendant and his father Tulsi Ram @ Tapeshwar Ram.
(c) Cost of the suit be awarded to the plaintiff against the defendant.
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.211 of 2019 dt.05-04-2019 4/6
(d) Any other relief or reliefs, the plaintiff found entitled be also awarded to the plaintiff.
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.211 of 2019 dt.05-04-2019 5/6
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.211 of 2019 dt.05-04-2019 6/6
respondents to implead the respondent no.2, as one of the plaintiffs, no illegality can be found with the order impugned, as it is neither without jurisdiction nor perverse.
is dismissed.
(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)
Md. S/sneha
AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A Uploading Date 12.04.2019 Transmission Date
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the lower court erred in allowing the addition of a co-sharer brother as an additional plaintiff in a title suit under Order I Rule 10(1) CPC.
Whether the High Court was justified in dismissing the writ petition seeking to set aside the order of addition of parties.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Om Prakash @ Om Prakash Arya
Ashok Kumar Rajgarhia
Gobind Prasad Rajgarhia
Ashwani Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
