← Library
Patna High CourtC.Misc./740/2017withdrawn

Ushlal Sah v. Dinesh Prasad And ORS

2024-01-09Mr. Justice Arun Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.740 of 2017 ====================================================== Ushlal Sah Son of Late Chatarbhuj Sah. Resident of Mohalla- Brahampura, P.O. M.I.T, P.S. Brahampura Munsifi Muzaffarpur East, District- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

Dinesh Prasad Son of Ram Chandra Sah.

2.

Gayatri Devi Wife of Raj Kishore Ojha, Respondent No. 1 Resident of Mohalla- Brahampura Chauk, Sanjay Cinema Road, P.O. M.I.T, P.S. Brahampura Munsifi Muzaffarpur East, District- Muzaffarpur and Respondent No. 2 Resident of Baleshar Thakur Marg, Brahampura, P.S. Brahampura, District- Muzaffarpur.

3.

The State of Bihar through the Collector, Muzaffarpur. 4.

The Secretary P.W.D. Central Govt. Delhi.

5.

The Superintendent Engineer C.P.W.D. North Bihar Circle R.C.D. at Maripur, P.S. Kazi Mohamadpur, Di ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arun Kumar, Advocate For Respondent No.1 :

Mr. Vikas Ratan Bharti, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, AC to GP-3 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 09-01-2024 Perusal of previous order dated 12.12.2023 shows that inadvertently, in second paragraph, in place of 'Pleader Commissioner', 'Pleading Commissioner' has been mentioned and similarly in third paragraph, in place of 'seeks', 'sought' has been mentioned.

2. Since the aforesaid errors are typographical in

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.740 of 2017(3) dt.09-01-2024 2/2 nature, as such, it is corrected to the extent that in place of 'Pleading Commissioner', 'Pleader Commissioner' and in place of 'sought', 'seeks' be read.

3. Present learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent no. 1 and learned counsel for the State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present petition has become infructuous and, as such, he seeks permission to withdraw the same.

5. Permission is accorded.

6. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J) DKS/- U