Mostt. Lagani Kuer And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.1181 of 2017 ======================================================
1. Mostt. Lagani Kuer Wife of Late Lal Bahadur Singh
2. Rajendra Singh Both Sons of Late Lal Bahadur Singh
3. Surendra Singh null All are Resident of Village-Dharmagat Parasi, P.O.- Gorakh Parasi, P.S.-Karakat (Gorari), District-Rohtas.
4. Panna Devi Wife of Sri Bachcha Singh and Daughter of Late Lal Bahadur Singh, Resident of Village-Bhagawatipur, P.O.-Jonhi, P.s.- Bikramganj, District-Rohtas.
5. Fula Devi Wife of Sri Upendra Singh and daughter of Late Lal Bahadur Singh, Resident of Village-Amai Bichali Patti, P.O.-Hasan Bazar, P.S.-Piro (Hasan Bazar), District-Bhojpur.
6. Babuchan Singh @ Babuchand Singh Son of Ishar Singh, Resident of Village-Parasiyan (Dharmagat Parasi), P.S.-Karakat, District-Rohtas. .... .... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Collector, Rohtas at Sasaram.
2. The Anchal Adhikari, Karakat, P.S.-Karakat, District-Rohtas (Sasaram).
3. Fulpatiya Devi Wife of Hari Kisun Ram, All are Resident of VillageDharmagat Parasi, P.S.-Karakat, District-Rohtas. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rajani Kant Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sajid Salim Khan-SC25 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 25-09-2018 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State.
The petitioners have filed this Civil Misc. petition against the order dated 08.02.2017 passed by Munsif-I, Bikramganj, Rohtas in Title Suit No. 57 of 2000 by which the petition of the petitioners for recalling the order marking ExhibitA/5, A/6, A/8 and A/9 as exhibits on the ground that those documents are not public documents has been rejected.
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.1181 of 2017 (2) dt.25-09-2018 2/2 The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that those documents are not public documents, therefore, the documents have wrongly been admitted in evidence as public documents but I do not find any force in the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners. Even if the documents have been admitted in evidence and marked as exhibits the petitioners/ plaintiffs have got every right to raise objection with regard to the evidentiary value of the documents admitted in evidence. The petitioners have also got right to raise objection about the admissibility of those documents at the time of argument of the suit.
Having considered the facts aforesaid, I find no reason to interfere in the impugned order. This Civil Misc. petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U