The court allowed an interim application to permit the appellant to withdraw the appeal following the amicable settlement of parties, after curing the defect in the vakalatnama. The appeal stands disposed.
Permission for the appellant to withdraw the appeal granted; First Appeal disposed of.
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 FIRST APPEAL No.638 of 1984
======================================================
OMPRAKAS SINGH son of Girdhari Singh, resident of village Raiparchor, P.S. and Anchal Shivsagar, District Rohtas (Sasaram)
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
….. (Defendant 1st Set ) …. Respondents
(Defendant 2nd Set) …… Respondent
Defendants 3rd set ) …. Respondents
(Defendant 4th set ) … .Respondents
.. .Transposed as respondent no. 8 vide order dated 1.8.2016
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Ms. Prakritita Sharma, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER
11 29-08-2022
I.A. no. 1 of 2022
Heard learned counsel for the appellant. No one
appears for the respondents.
It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the appellant that the instant appeal had been preferred by the appellant no. 1 as also his minor brother who was appellant no. 2 in the appeal.
By order dated 1.8.2016, the appellant no. 2 was
Patna High Court FA No.638 of 1984(11) dt.29-08-2022 2/2
declared major, the guardian was discharged and it was further directed that Vakalatnama duly executed by appellant no. 2 be filed within one month failing which the appellant no. 2 shall be transposed as respondent in this appeal. No Vakalatnama having been filed on behalf of the appellant no. 2, pursuant to the order dated 1.8.2016, he stood transposed as respondent.
It is further submitted that the Advocate on record of the instant appeal died during pendency of the appeal and as such learned counsel has filed a fresh Vakalatnama duly executed by the appellant no. 1 (now the sole appellant) on 3.8.2022 which is available on record. Further in the instant application, learned counsel for the appellant prays that in view of the amicable settlement between the parties, the appellant be permitted to withdraw the instant appeal.
In view of the above, the appeal is permitted to be withdrawn.
I.A. no. 1 of 2022 is allowed.
The appeal stands disposed of.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Spd/-
U
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appeal can be withdrawn upon the filing of a fresh vakalatnama and amicable settlement.
Whether the appellant being permitted to withdraw the instant appeal is in order.
Omparakas Singh
Uday Pratap Singh
Birendra Kumar Singh
Girdhari Singh
Nirmal Kumar Singh
Bimlesh Kumar Singh
Partha Sarthy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
