Omprakas Singh v. Uday Pratap Singh

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

1. UDAY PRATAP SINGH Son of Late Balkeshwar Singh

2. Birendra Kumar Singh @ Bipin Bihari Singh son of Udai Pratap Singh resident of village Raipurchor, P.S. Sheogagar, P.S. Raipurchor, District Rohtas ..... (Defendant 1st Set ) .... Respondents

3. Girdhari Singh, son of Late Bal Keshwar Singh of village Raipurchor, P.S. Sheosagar, District Rohtas (Defendant 2nd Set) ...... Respondent

4. Nirmal Kumar Singh, son of Late Balkeshwar Singh

5. Bimlesh Kumar Singh

6. Kamlesh Kumar Singh both sons of Nrmal Kumar Singh, resident of village Raipurchor, P.S. Sheogagar, P.S. Raipurchor, District Rohtas Defendants 3rd set ) .... Respondents

7. Jagdish Singh son of Banwari Singh of village Jalalpur P.S. Said Raja, District Varanasi (U.P. ) (Defendant 4th set ) ... .Respondents

8. Kumar Amarendar Singh son of Girdhari Singh, resident of village Raiparchor, P.S. and Anchal Shivsagar, District Rohtas (Sasaram) .. .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 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