Prabha Devi v. Most. Kismatiya Devi And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8817 of 2014 ===========================================================

1. PRABHA DEVI WIFE OF LATE SURESH KUMAR SINGH. RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - GYASPUR (RASULPUR), P.S. - AMNOUR, DISTRICT SARAN AT CHAPRA (BIHAR).

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. MOST. KISMATIYA DEVI WIFE OF LATE BAIDYA NATH SINGH.

2. MITHILESH KUER WIFE OF LATE DINESH SINGH.

3. BASANTI DEVI DAUGHTER OF LATE BAIDYA NATH SINGH.

4. KALAWATI DEVI DAUGHTER OF LATE BAIDYA NATH SINGH.

5. ANAND KUMAR SINGH SON OF LATE BAIDYA NATH SINGH.

6. MANOJ KUMAR SINGH SON OF LATE BAIDYA NATH SINGH. ALL ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - GYASPUR (RASULPUR), P.S. - AMNOUR, DISTRICT - SARAN (BIHAR).

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. NATH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 19-04-2016 Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent nos. 1, 3, 5 and 6.

No body has appeared today on behalf of the petitioner. The matter has been placed under the heading 'For Orders' today as the parties have been heard on 12.04.2016. Mr. Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent nos. 1, 3, 5 and 6 has submitted that the Succession Case No. 36 of 2011 has now been disposed of and the succession certificate has been issued on 08.01.2016 by the court of Sub-Judge-

Patna High Court CWJC No.8817 of 2014 dt.19-04-2016 1, Saran. Learned counsel has also produced photocopy of the said succession certificate for perusal before this court. There is no denial of this fact on behalf of the petitioner. The learned counsel has also relied on the order passed by this Court in C.W.J.C No. 21712 of 2012 and C.W.J.C No. 2175 of 2012 in order to persuade this Court that there is no substance in the case as well as the relief prayed by the petitioner in this application. After considering the aforesaid facts and the materials produced on behalf of the respondents showing that the succession case no. 36 of 2011 in which the impugned order has already been disposed of, this writ application is held to have become infructuous and is, accordingly, dismissed as such.

(V. Nath, J) Ranjan/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date Transmission Date