Dismissed

Butta Paswan @ Balgovind Paswan v. Bharat Lal Agrawal and Ors.

Patna HC28 Aug 2023C.Misc./1437/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an oral order, Justice Sandeep Kumar dismissed a civil miscellaneous application filed by the petitioner to set aside an earlier order rejecting a request to recall evidence. The court held the application was mala fide and filed merely to delay the proceeding.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed as the petitioner's request to recall evidence was held to be bona fide and a mala fide attempt to delay the case.

Butta Paswan @ Balgovind Paswan Vs Bharat Lal… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.1437 of 2018

¶2

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

¶3

Butta Paswan @ Balgovind Paswan S/o Late Karu Paswan, Resident of Village- Pasewa, P.S.- Imamganj, District- Gaya.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

Bharat Lal Agrawal and Ors S/o Late Ramchandra Sao,

¶7

Vijay Prasad Agrawal, S/o Late Rajendra Prasad Agrawal,

¶8

Vinod Prasad Agrawal, S/o Late Rajendra Prasad Agrawal,

¶9

Arun Devi, D/o Late Rajendra Prasad Agrawal,

¶10

Munni Devi, D/o Late Rajendra Prasad Agrawal,

¶11

Sarswati Devi, D/o Late Rajendra Prasad Agrawal,

¶12

Rita Devi, D/o Late Rajendra Prasad Agrawal,

¶13

Rinki Devi, D/o Late Rajendra Prasad Agrawal,

¶14

Rajo Agrawal, S/o Late Triyogi Nath Agrawal, S/o Late Savitri Devi,

¶15

Gangotri Devi, W/o Late Ram Balam Pd. Sao, D/o Late Ramchandra Sao,

¶16

Mani Devi, D/o Late Ramchandra Sao, All residents of Village- Pasewa, P.S.- Imamganj, District- Gaya.

¶17

Mahendra Paswan, S/o Butta Paswan, Resident of Village- Pasewa, P.S.Imamganj, District- Gaya.

¶18

Shyamlal Sao, S/o Late Manadeo Sao, Resident of Village- Pasewa, P.S.Imamganj, District- Gaya. at present residing at Village- Kuju, P.O. and P.S.Kuju, District- Hazaribagh, Jharkhand.

¶19

Shatrughan Prasad, S/o Late Saryu Prasad, Resident of Village- Pasewa, P.S.- Imamganj, District- Gaya. at present posted as Teacher Middle School, Village- Malhari, P.S.- Imamganj, District- Gaya.

¶20

... ... Respondent/s

¶21

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

¶22

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ankit Katriar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Nand Kishore Prasad Sinha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶23

9 28-08-2023

¶24

I.A No. 1 of 2023

¶25

The present interlocutory application has been filed

¶26

for substitution of heirs and legal representatives of respondent

¶27

no. 10 who died during the pendency of the present application.

¶28

2. For the reasons mentioned in the interlocutory

¶29

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.1437 of 2018(9) dt.28-08-2023 2/3

¶30

application, it is allowed. Let the heirs and legal representatives of respondent no.10, as mentioned in paragraph 2 thereof, be substituted in her place and the name of respondent no. 10 be expunged from the array of the parties.

¶31

3. This application has been filed for setting aside the order dated 21.08.2018 passed by learned Addl. Munsif-I, SubDivisional Civil Court, Sherghati, Gaya in Title Suit No. 04 of 2016 (12 of 1999) by which learned Munsif has rejected the application of the petitioner for recalling the order of closing of evidence.

¶32

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that Title Suit of 1999 was fixed in the Court below for judgment on 28.02.2018 after the final hearing. The defendant nos. 1 and 2 filed an application for recalling of evidence on the date of judgment saying that they want to lead evidence and want to prove the original parwana in the suit. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of K.K. Velusamy Vs. N. Palanisamy reported in (2011) 11 SCC 275 .

¶33

5. Mr. Nand Kishore Pd. Sinha, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the present application filed by the petitioner is mala fide just to delay the case, the opposite

¶34

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.1437 of 2018(9) dt.28-08-2023 3/3

¶35

parties/respondents have filed this case in the year 1999 and thereafter, both the parties have lead their evidence, argued the case and on the date of judgment and an application has been filed by the petitioner for recalling the evidence and the same is mala fide .

¶36

6. I have considered the submissions of the parties.

¶37

7. In my opinion, the present application filed by the petitioner is not bona fide but is mala fide just to delay the case. Once he had got a chance to adduce his evidence, he should adduce all the evidences including the original copy of the parwana . If he had original records, he should have been vigilant enough to produce the same when he was examining his witnesses. Moreover, the judgment cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner is of no help to the petitioner as it also speaks that power shall be exercised only in a case of bonafide application filed by any of the party. This kind of frivolous application filed by the petitioner has rightly been rejected by the court below. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

¶38

(Sandeep Kumar, J)

¶39

Harsh/

¶40

U T

Butta Paswan @ Balgovind Paswan v. Bharat Lal Agrawal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Butta Paswan @ Balgovind Paswan v. Bharat Lal Agrawal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vashishta Mishra @ Bashishtha Mishra Vs The State Of Bihar

Abhimanyu Prasad Vs The State Of Bihar

Sujit Singh @ Bhundi Vs the State of Bihar

Kanhaiya Singh @ Kanhaiya Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Jitendra Kumar @ Jitendra Kumar Srivastava and Anr. Vs Akhilesh Rai and Ors.

Vishwambhar Jha @ Bishwambhar Jha Vs The State of Bihar