Patna High CourtC.Misc./1956/2017dismissed

Vindeshwar Sah v. Chandeshwar Sah And ORS

2018-12-20Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.1956 of 2017 ====================================================== Vindeshwar Sah, Son of Late Munshi Sah @ Munshi Lal Sah, Resident of Mohalla- Imadpur Mithapur, P.O.- Pastara, P.S.- Baligaon, Dist.- Vaishali. ... ... Defendant-Petitioner

Versus

1. Chandeshwar Sah, Son of Late Munshi Lal Sah, Resident of MohallaImadpur, P.O. Pastara, P.S.- Baligaon, Dist.- Vaishali. ... ...Plaintiff-Defendant 1st party

2. Phuljhari Devi, Wife of late Munshi Lal Sah

3. Sitaram Sah, Son of Late Munshi Lal Sah.

4. Mahesh Sah, Son of Late Munshi Lal Sah, All resident of Mohalla- Imadpur, P.O.- Pastara, P.S.- Baligaon, Dist.- Vaishali. ... ...Defendants-Defendants 2nd party

5. Kedar Chaudhari, Son of Late Ram Gulam Chaudhari, Resident of MohallaImadpur, P.O.- Pastara, P.S.- Baligaon, Dist.- Vaishali.

6. Narayan Das, Son of Late Lakhan Das, Resident of Village + P.O. + P.S.- Patepur, Dist.- Vaishali.

7. Uttam Sahani, Son of Late Faujdar Sahni, Resident of Mohalla- Imadpur Mithapur, P.O.- Pastara, P.S.- Baligaon, Dist.- Vaishali. ... ...Defendants-Defendants 3rd Party

8. Smt. Sanjhariya Devi, Wife of Sri Sitaram Sah.

9. Smt. Shakuntla Devi, Wife of Sri Vindeshwar Sah.

10. Smt. Sunita Devi, Wife of Sri Mahesh Sah, All residents of Mohalla- Imadpur, P.O- Pastara, P.S.- Baligaon, Dist.- Vaishali. ... ... Defendants-Defendants 4th Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Sunil Kumar For the Respondent/s :

Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 20-12-2018 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner has filed this civil miscellaneous petition against the order dated 24.08.2017, passed by the learned Sub-Judge-VIII, Vaishali at Hajipur in Partition Suit No.557 of 2009 by which the amendment petition of the plaintiff for adding his sisters as defendants in the suit has been allowed on payment of cost of Rs.1500/-.

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.1956 of 2017(2) dt.20-12-2018 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the plaintiff time and again filed amendment petition and the same was allowed. This is the third time, the plaintiff filed amendment petition for impleading his sisters as defendants in the suit and the same was also allowed.

I find that the plaintiff filed the partition suit but he could not implead his sisters as defendants. Sisters of the plaintiff are necessary parties and the learned court below has rightly allowed the amendment petition of the plaintiff for impleading his sisters as defendants in the suit. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in this civil miscellaneous petition and the same is dismissed. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) S.KUMAR/- U