Allowed

Ram Kishore Singh v. Kanti Devi and Ors.

Patna HC1 Sept 2023C.Misc./676/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court allowed an amendment petition filed in a 1997 suit by the defendant to alter the date of death of a party. The court held the amendment would not change the nature of the suit and was in the interest of justice.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the order dated 26.02.2018; allowed the amendment petition dated 27.11.2017; directed Sub-Judge to conclude the suit within one year.

Ram Kishore Singh Vs Kanti Devi and Ors. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.676 of 2018

¶2

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

¶3

Ram Kishore Singh Son of Late Ganesh Singh, Resident of Village-Karah, P.O. Harpur Karah, Pragana Goa, P.S. Baniyapur, District-Saran.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

Kanti Devi Daughter of Late Ram Naresh Singh and Wife of Kameshwar Singh, Resident of Village-Eksar, P.O. and P.S. Rasulpur, District-Saran.

¶7

Ramawati Devi, Daughter of Late Ram Naresh Singh and Wife of Man Mohan Singh.

¶8

Chandrawati Devi, Daughter of Late Ram Naresh Siungh and Wife of Amleshwar Singh. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 Resident of Village-Kaparpura, P.O. P.S. Mirganj, District- Gopalganj.

¶9

Dr. Ajay Bahadur Singh, Son of Late Ram Prasann Singh, Resident of Village-Karah, P.O. Harpur, P.S. Baniyarpur, District Saran at Present Loha Garh Tea Estate, P.O. and P.S. Belgachhi, Distirct Darjeeling, West Bengal.

¶10

Vijay Bahadur Singh, Son of Late Ram Prasann Singh, Resident of VillageKarah, P.O Harpur karah, P.S. Baniyapur, District Saran, at Present Barhariwa Krishi Utpadan Samiti, P.O. and P.S. Barharwa District Sahebganj.

¶11

Anita Kuer, Wife of Late Raghu Bansh Narayan Singh, Resident of VillageKarah P.O. Harpur, P.S. Baniyapur,District Saran at Present Village and P.O. Parauna, P.S. Taraiya, District-Saran.

¶12

Dinesh Singh

¶13

Bhirgu Singh Sons of Late Baij Nath Singh

¶14

Rameshwar Singh

¶15

Biran Singh

¶16

Sushil Kumar Singh, Son of Late Raj Nandan Singh. Respondent nos. 7 to 11 Resident of Village-Karah, P.O. Harpur, P.S. Baniyapur, District-Saran.

¶17

Madhu Bala, Wife of late Srawan Singh and Daughter of Late Ram Prasann Singh, Resident of Village-Ram Nagar, P.S.Bairiya, District Ballia U.P..

¶18

Umrawari devi, Wife of Upendra Singh and Daughter of Late Ram Prasann Singh, Resident of Village-Pipara, P.S. Andar, Distirct-Siwan.

¶19

Sudama Singh

¶20

Rajendra Singh Sons of Late Raj Nandan Singh Resident of Village-Karah, P.O. Harpur, P.S. Bainyapur, District Saran.

¶21

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.676 of 2018(6) dt.01-09-2023 2/3

¶22

Raj Kishore Singh, Son of Late Ganesh Singh, Resident of Village-Karah, P.O. Harpur, P.S. Baniyapur, District-Saran.

¶23

... ... Respondent/s

¶24

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nagendra Rai For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶25

6 01-09-2023 Heard the parties.

¶26

This application has been filed for set aside the order dated 26.02.2018 (Annexure-5) passed by S. J. 11^th Chapra in T.S. No. 29 of 1997 and allow amendment petition dated 27.11.2017 (Annexure-3) filed by the petitioner and the respondent 4^th set.

¶27

The amendment application dated 27.11.2017 filed by the defendant changing the date of death of Gaya Singh has been rejected.

¶28

Learned counsel for the plaintiff submitted that the same is sought to be changed after 30 years.

¶29

In my opinion, the amendment will not change the nature of the suit and the defendant may be permitted to make this amendment in the interest of justice.

¶30

The order dated 26.02.2018 is hereby quashed and the application dated 27.11.2017 is allowed.

¶31

The Sub Judge concerned is directed to conclude

¶32

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.676 of 2018(6) dt.01-09-2023 3/3

¶33

the suit which is of year 1997 within one year of receipt of copy of this order.

¶34

In view of the amendment, the plaintiff has all the

¶35

right to rebut the same including the recall of the witnesses.

¶36

In view of above, this application is disposed of.

¶37

(Sandeep Kumar, J)

¶38

Ranjeet/-

¶39

Ram Kishore Singh v. Kanti Devi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Kishore Singh v. Kanti Devi and Ors.

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

Sogarath Paswan and Ors. Vs Ram Pyare Mahto and Ors.

Nepali Mahton Vs Chaklokma Devi

Hari Shankar Mishra Vs Shatrughan Jha

Krishna Murari Tiwari Vs Ram Krit Tiwari

Manoj Kumar and Ors. Vs Ram Babu Sah and Ors.

Randhir Kumar Singh, Vs Dhirendra Kumar Singh