Smt.Sonwatiya Devi @ Chandi De v. Raghunandan Mahton And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Second Appeal No.289 of 2008 ====================================================== Smt.Sonwatiya Devi @ Chandi Devi, wife of Late Chaitu Sada, resident of Village Dih Jhapari, PS Medini Chowki, PO Kiranpur, District Munger ............... Plaintiff....... Appellant .... .... Appellant
Versus
1. Raghunandan Mahton
2. Shri Prasad Mahton
3. Parmanand Mahton All sons of Khanon Mahton
4. Shyam Mahton, S/o Hakim Mahton @ Staya Narain Mahton, all residents of Village Dih Jhapani, PS Medini Chowki, PO Kiranpur, District Munger
5. Smt. Suma Devi, wife of Jhari Mahton, resident of Village Khawa, PS Medini Chowki, PO Kiranpur, District Munger
6. Smt. Sudha Devi, wife of Jogi Mahton @ Yogendra Mahton, resident of Village Sanha, PS Sahebpur Kamal, PO Sanha, District Begusarai
7. Smt. Baruniya Devi, wife of Damodar Mahton, resident of Village Imam Nagar, PO Kabadpur (Manikpur), PS Surajgraha, District Munger
8. Rukni Devi, wife (not known to the Appellant) resident of Village Maheshpur, PO & PS Piri Bazar, District Munger
9. Smt. Rania Devi, wife of Chandu Mahton, resiodent of Village Manikpur, PO Kabadpur, PS Manikpur, District Munger
10. Smt. Chanki Devi, wife of (not known to the Appellant) resident of Village Paharpur, PS Medini Chowki, District Munger
11. Lukhia Devi, wife of (Not known to the Appellant), resident of Village Hemazapur, PO Hemzapur, PS Dharahra, District Munger .......... Defendants ............ Respondents .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : None For the Respondent/s : Mr.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. NATH ORAL ORDER 16-02-2015 None appears on behalf of the appellant.
Perused the office notes, from which it transpires that this appeal has stood dismissed in default for non-compliance of the order dated 12.11.2013 as against respondent nos. 4, 6, 8 to 11. It appears from the records that this appeal was barred by limitation and notice was issued on the limitation petition (I.A. No. 7264 of
Patna High Court SA No.289 of 2008 (8) dt.16-02-2015 2011), but that peremptory order which was for filing requisites for fresh service of notice to respondent nos. 4,6, 8 to 11 was not complied.
The plaintiff is the appellant in this appeal against the judgment and decree of affirmance passed by the appellate court. The suit has been filed for declaration of title and possession over the bamboo clumps and Peepal trees over the suit land described in Schedule 'K' of the plaint, and in the alternative the prayer for recovery of possession has also been made, in case of dispossession during pendency of the suit. The relief of permanent injunction has also been sought.
Respondent nos. 4, 6, 8 to 11 were defendants in the suit. As this appeal has stood dismissed, as against the aforesaid respondent nos. 4, 6, 8 to 11, proceeding further with this appeal may result in chances of conflicting decrees or orders. In the result, this appeal is dismissed as incompetent. (V. Nath, J.) Snkumar/- U