Patna High CourtSA/4/1997dismissed

District Manager,Food Corp.Andor v. Kishore Trading Transport Agen

2016-03-17Mr. Justice V. Nath2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Second Appeal No.4 of 1997 ======================================================

1. District Manager, Food Corporation of India, District Saharsa

2. The District Manager, Food Corporation of India, District Purnea

3. The Regional Manager, Food Corporation of India, Arunanchal Building, Exhibition Road, Patna ............ Defendants ............. Respondents .... .... Appellants

Versus

1. Kishore Trading Transport Agency, Saharsa through Radhey Shyam Agrawal the proprietor of the Firm

2. Radhey Shyam Agrawal, son of Suraj Mal Agrawal, Proprietor Kishor Tradiong Transport Agency, Saharsa ..... Plaintiffs .... Appellants

3. The State of Bihar, through District Magistrate, Saharsa

4. District Magistrate, Saharsa

5. District Manager, Bihar State Food Corporation, Saharsa ................ Defendants ............ Respondents .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Binod Shanker Tiwary Mr. Arun Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. NATH ORAL ORDER 17-03-2016 Heard learned Counsel for the appellants, who has submitted that this appeal can proceed even in absence of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 on record.

From perusal of the judgment and decree under appeal it transpires that respondent Nos. 1 and 2 were the only two plaintiffs in the suit as well as in the appeal. In the present second appeal those two plaintiffs have been impleaded as respondent Nos. 1 and 2. From perusal of the office note it transpires that this appeal stood dismissed for default as against respondent nos. 1 and 2. It further transpires that the remaining respondent Nos. 3 to 5 were defendants in the suit.

Patna High Court SA No.4 of 1997 (15) dt.17-03-2016 In this view of the matter, there is no substance in the submission on behalf of the appellants that this appeal can proceed even in absence of the plaintiffs on record. As such, this appeal is dismissed as incompetent.

(V. Nath, J.) Snkumar/- U