← Library
Patna High CourtC.Misc./1370/2017dismissed

Md. Siddique Alias Siddique Hussain And ORS v. Bibi Angej Bano And ORS

2024-06-24Mr. Justice Arun Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.1370 of 2017 ====================================================== 1.

Md. Siddique Alias Siddique Hussain and Ors Son of Md. Sadamani, 2.

Md. Sultan alias Sultan Ali, Son of Md. Sadamani. 3.

Md. Sikandar alias Sikandar Ali, Son Md. Sadamani. 4.

Md. Mansoor alias Mansoor Alam, Son Md. Sadamani. 5.

Md. Najrul alias Najrul Haque, Son of Late Mohiuddin, 6.

Md. Azam alias Azam, Son of Late Nayeemuddin. 7.

Md. Nizam alias Nizamuddin, Son of Late Nayeemuddin. 8.

Md. Ekramul alias Ekramul, son of Md. Islam.

9.

Md. Nayeemul Haque, Son of Md. Islam.

10.

Md. Lutful alias Lutfur, Son of Late Nayeemuddin, All resident of Village Khutti Hasaili, P.S. K. Nagar, District- Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

Bibi Angej Bano, Wife of Md. Mojaffar.

2.

Bibi Hawanoor Khatoon, Wife of Md. Mobarak Ali. 3.

Bibi Nargis Bano, Wife of Md. Naushad Ali.

4.

Md. Sabur Ali, Son of Md Amjad Ali.

5.

Md. Saifuddin, son of Abdul Jabbar.

6.

Md. Abdul Hanan, Son of Md. Saifuddin.

7.

Md. Farjan, Wife of Md. Saifuddin.

8.

Bibi Arjan Khatoon, Wife of Mojibur, All resident of Village- Khutti Hasaili, P.S. K. Nagar District- Purnea.

9.

Smt. Kishori Devi, Wife of Kumar Daya Nand Singh, resident of Village Champa Nagar Dyorhi, P.S. Champa Nagar, District- Purnea. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Bijendra Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 24-06-2024 On call, none appears for the petitioners. However, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 4 and 6 to 8 is present.

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.1370 of 2017(5) dt.24-06-2024 2/2

2. Vide order dated 23.04.2024, the learned counsel for the petitioners was directed to file substitution petition for respondent nos. 5 and 9 as they were reported to be dead, within four weeks, failing which, it was made clear, the petition was to be dismissed.

3. Office has reported that no substitution petition towards compliance of the order dated 23.04.2024 has been filed.

4. Under the circumstances, this petition stands dismissed for non-compliance of the order dated 23.04.2024. (Arun Kumar Jha, J) V.K.Pandey/- U