Chandra Kumar Yadav And ORS v. Tara Kunwar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.821 of 2017 ====================================================== 1.

Chandra Kumar Yadav 2.

Shyam Kumar Yadav, Both sons of Late Satya Narain Yadav, 3.

Smt. Kamini Devi, Daughter of Yamuna Prasad Yadav and wife of Bindeshwari Prasad Yadav, 4.

Ramji Yadav @ Ramji Mandal, 5.

Bindeshwari Yadav, Both sons of Late Banni Lal Yadav, 6.

Most. Satyabhama Devi, wife of Late Satya Narain Yadav, 7.

Manjula Devi, wife of Birbal Yadav and Daughter of Late Satya Narain Yadav, 8.

Babita Devi, wife of Bablu Prasad Yadav, 9.

Sanjula Devi alias Kendula Devi, wife of Upendra Prasad Yadav, Petitioner nos. 7,8 and 9 are daughters of Late Satya Narain Yadav, 10.

Niraj Kumar, son of Bindeshwari Yadav, 11.

Deo Narain Mandal son of Ganeshi Mandal, all resident of Mouja Baisardh, Tola- Gairwa Bhitta, P.O.- Baisardh P.S.- Kumar Khand, DistrictMadhepura. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

Tara Kunwar, wife of Chandan Kumar, daughter of Late Rekh Chand Sah, resident of Village and P.O.- Samashpar, P.S.- Kumarkhand, DistrictKhagaria. 2.

Chandra Kishore Sah, 3.

Deo Kishore Sah, Both sons of Late Rekh Chand Sah, all resident of Mouja and Village Israin Kala, Tola Jaduapatti, P.S.- Kumarkhand, DistrictMadhepura. 4.

Bindeshwari Sah, son of Late Babuan Sah, 5.

Ashok Sah @ Kalanand Sah, son of Bindeshwari Sah, 6.

Pulendra Sah, 7.

Mayanand Sah, both sons of Bindeshwari Sah, 8.

Hari Nandan Sah, son of Late Jhabbu Sah, 9.

Bal Krishna Sah, 10.

Bidyanand Sah, both sons of Hari Nandan Sah, 11.

Prithwi Chand Sah, 12.

Sadanand Sah, 13.

Mahant Sah,

2/4 Sl nos. 11 to 13 sons of Late Shaini Sah, 14.

Tara Chand Sah, son of Late Kallar Sah, 15.

Bishundeo Sah, 16.

Dinesh Sah, 17.

Umesh Sah, 18.

Uday Sah, Sl no. 15 to 18 are sons of Tara Chand Sah, 19.

Bindeshwari Yadav, 20.

Bal Krishna Yadav, 21.

Chandeshwari Yadav, 22.

Debo Yadav, Sl. no.19 to 22 are sons of Late Pooaya Yadav, 23.

Urmila Devi, wife of Late Surya Narain Sah, 24.

Kartik Sah, son of Late Surya Narain Sah, 25.

Janki Devi, 26.

Manki Devi, both daughters of Late Bhumi Sah, 27.

Jagdeo Sah, 28.

Sahdeo Sah, 29.

Kailoo Sah, 30.

Rabindra Sah, Sl. no. 27 to 30 sons of Late Bhumi Sah, 31.

Harakh Chand Sah, 32.

Dharam Chand Sah, 33.

Sukal Sah, 34.

Bijendra Saj, Sl. no.31 to 34 are sons of Late Bhajju Sah, 35.

Most. Kari Devi, wife of Late Bhajju Sah, 36.

Chandeshwari Sah, 37.

Upendra Sah, 38.

Ashok Sah, 39.

Brahmdeo Sah, Sl. no.36 to 39 are sons of Late Mahabir Sah, 40.

Hira Lal Sah, son of Late Mohan Sah, 41.

Sudhir Kumar Sah, son of Hira Lal Sah, 42.

Shankar Sah, son of Bindeshwari Sah, respondent nos.4 to 42 all resident of Baisardh, Tola Bhairopur, P.S. Kumar Khand, District- Madhepura. 43.

Urmila Devi, wife of Late Bidyanand Yadav, 44.

Radhe Shyam Yadav, 45.

Bijendra Yadav,

3/4 46.

Gajendra Yadav, 47.

Surendra Yadav, Sl. no. 44 to 47 are sons of Late Bidyanand Yadav, respondent nos. 43 to 47 all resident of Baisardh, Tola Gairwa Bhitta, P.S.- Kumar Khand, DistrictMadhepura. 48.

Rup Chand Sah, son of Late Abhilakh Sah, 49.

Vijay Sah, 50.

Manoj Sah, 51.

Binod Sah, Sl. nos. 49 to 51 are sons of Rup Chand Sah, 52.

Kishore Sah, 53.

Gopal Sah, both sons of Late Dharam Chand Sah, 54.

Laxman Sah, 55.

Bharat Sah, Both sons of Late Harakh Chand Sah, 56.

Bikram Sah, son of Bharat Sah, 57.

Mithilesh Sah, 58.

Abdhesh Sah, 59.

Anil Sah, 60.

Suman Sah, Sl. no. 52 to 60 are sons of Laxman Sah, respondent nos. 52 to 60 are all resident of Mouja Israinkala, Tola Jaduapatti, P.S.- Kumar Khand, DistrictMadhepura. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Lala Sachindra Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Kumar Vishoka Nand ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 26-09-2024 The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Title Suit No. 17/1997 has been disposed of and now the matter has become infructuous and, as such, he seeks permission to withdraw the instant petition.

2. Permission is accorded.

3. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed as

4/4 withdrawn.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J) V.K.Pandey/- U