Prahlad Prasad v. Rohit Kuma And ANR
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.483 of 2016 (2) dt.01-09-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.483 of 2016 ====================================================== Prahlad Prasad .... .... Appellant/s
Versus
Rohit Kumar & Anr .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Dr. Alok Kumar Sinha For the Respondent/s : Mr.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR SAHOO ORAL ORDER 01-09-2016 Heard the learned counsel, Dr. Alok Kumar Sinha for the petitioner.
Perused the order dated 25.02.2016 passed by the learned Sub Judge VII, Saran, Chapra in Title Suit No.132 of 2006 whereby the learned Court below held that the Court who has passed the order dated 04.07.2015 will be the best Court to appreciate and consider the application of review and directed the petitioner to take appropriate steps.
From perusal of this Civil Miscellaneous application, it appears that the order, which is sought to be reviewed i.e. order dated 04.07.2015, is Annexure 1 to this Civil Miscellaneous application. From perusal of the said order, it appears that the original plaintiff died on 27.09.2009 and thereafter the present plaintiffs-respondents have been substituted in his place. The petitioner filed application for deciding the legal representatives of
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.483 of 2016 (2) dt.01-09-2016 the deceased sole plaintiff. According to the petitioners, the father of the present respondents is still there, therefore, the respondents are not the heirs of the deceased plaintiff. The Court below by that order dated 04.07.2015 had allowed the substitution of the plaintiffs-respondents.
So far the question that whether they are entitled to any relief or not is a question that can be decided finally at the stage of hearing. It appears that the petitioner is trying to delay the matter. The order dated 04.07.2015 is perfect, legal, valid and within the jurisdiction of the Court and, therefore, it needs no review. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Civil Miscellaneous application is dismissed. (Mungeshwar Sahoo, J) Saurabh/- U T