Ashok Kumar Singh v. Uday Pratap Singh And ANR

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.312 of 2016 (3) dt.09-02-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.312 of 2016 ====================================================== Ashok Kumar Singh .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

Uday Pratap Singh & Anr .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Leelawati Kumari For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR SAHOO ORAL ORDER 09-02-2017 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.

Perused the impugned order dated 24.02.2016 passed in Title Suit No.21 of 2014 by the learned Sub Judge I, Aurangabad whereby the learned court below rejected the intervention application filed by the petitioner.

It appears that notices were issued to the respondents. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the case made out by the intervener is that the property was acquired by Shri Singh and that Shri Singh had kept this intervener-petitioner to look after his property, therefore, he filed the application claiming that he has got interest in the property. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, that when the question of title is involved and the intervener himself made out a case that Shri Singh had acquired the property

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.312 of 2016 (3) dt.09-02-2017 and he is looking after the property only, therefore, he is not an interested party in the suit.

Thus, I find no reason to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction. Accordingly, this civil miscellaneous application is dismissed. (Mungeshwar Sahoo, J) Saurabh/- U T