Meena Devi v. Birendra Rajbansi

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.579 of 2025 ====================================================== Meena Devi wife of Arbind Singh, Resident of Village-Kajoor, P.S.-Atri, District-Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

Birendra Rajbansi son of Bandhu Rajbansi, Resident of Village-Kajoor, Tola-Sukhe Bigha, P.S.-Atri, District-Gaya.

2.

Chhote Lall, son of Rameshwar Rajbansi, Resident of Village-Kajoor, TolaSukhe Bigha, P.S.-Atri, District-Gaya. 3.

Arjun, Resident of Village-Kajoor, Tola-Sukhe Bigha, P.S.-Atri, DistrictGaya. 4.

Ramswaroop Rajbansi, son of Rameshwar Rajbansi, Resident of VillageKajoor, Tola-Sukhe Bigha, P.S.-Atri, District-Gaya. 5.

Atwari Rajbansi, son of Komal Rajbansi, Resident of Village-Kajoor, TolaSukhe Bigha, P.S.-Atri, District-Gaya. 6.

Lakhan Rajbansi, son of Kamal Rajbansi, Resident of Village-Kajoor, TolaSukhe Bigha, P.S.-Atri, District-Gaya. 7.

Mosafir Rajbansi, son of Late Munis Rajbansi, Resident of Village-Kajoor, Tola-Sukhe Bigha, P.S.-Atri, District-Gaya.

8.

The State of Bihar through Collector, Gaya.

9.

The Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya.

10.

The Additional Collector (Revenue), Gaya.

11.

The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Neemchak Bathani, Gaya. 12.

The Anchal Adhikari, Atri, P.S.-Atri, District-Gaya. 13.

Srikanta Kumar @ Luchu Singh, son of Late Bidhi Prasad Singh, Resident of Village-Kajoor, Tola-Suke Bigha Atri, P.S.-Atri, District-Gaya. 14.

Sri Satendra Prasad Singh, son of Late Bidhi Prasad Singh, Resident of Village-Kajoor, Tola-Suke Bigha Atri, P.S.-Atri, District-Gaya. 15.

Sri Mithlesh Kumar Singh @ Chhote Singh, son of Late Bidhi Prasad Singh, Resident of Village-Kajoor, Tola-Suke Bigha Atri, P.S.-Atri, District-Gaya. 16.

Dhirendra Kumar Singh @ Bita Singh, Son of Late Bidhi Prasad Singh, Resident of Village-Kajoor, Tola-Suke Bigha Atri, P.S.-Atri, District-Gaya. 17.

Sri Abhinay Kumar Singh @ Bhuta Singh, son of Late Bidhi Prasad Singh, Resident of Village-Kajoor, Tola-Suke Bigha Atri, P.S.-Atri, District-Gaya. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mrs. Meena Kumari, Advocate Mr. Ritu Raj, Advocate Ms. Kanika, Advocate Mr. Vardaan Mangalam, Advocate Ms. Ritika Rani, Advocate

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.579 of 2025(2) dt.09-07-2025 2/3 For the Respondent/s :

Ms. Neela Kumari, AC to SC-3 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 09-07-2025 Record taken up on mentioning being made on behalf of the petitioner.

02. Present learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondent-State.

03. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present petition has been filed for directing the learned Sub Judge-VII, Gaya to conclude the Execution Case No. 05 of 2014 arising out of judgment dated 19.01.2013 and decree dated 28.01.2013, respectively passed in Title Suit No. 03/2009/242/2018, expeditiously. Learned counsel further submits that though the execution case has been filed in the year 2014, the decree-holder/petitioner is yet to get the benefit of fruit of the decree and in the light of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rahul S. Shah vs. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi and Others reported in (2021) 6 SCC 418, the executing court are expected to dispose of the proceeding of execution cases within six months. Thus, the learned counsel submits that the learned executing court may be directed to dispose of the Execution Case No. 05 of 2014 at the earliest within some stipulated time in the light of directions given by

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.579 of 2025(2) dt.09-07-2025 3/3 the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rahul S. Shah (supra)

04. Since the petitioner has approached this Court with limited prayer is for expeditious disposal of the execution case in the light of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rahul S. Shah (supra), I do not think there is any need to issue notice to the other respondents and the present matter could be disposed of straightway.

05. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the learned Sub Judge-VII, Gaya/court concerned is directed to expedite and dispose of the Execution Case No. 05 of 2014 at the earliest and in terms of the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rahul S. Shah (supra).

06. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observation.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J) Ashish/- U