Patna High CourtCWJC/13151/2015dismissed

Md. Yasin Mian @ Mohammad Yaseen v. Md. Rafique And ORS

2016-05-12Mr. Justice Mungeshwar Sahoo2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13151 of 2015 ======================================================

1. Md. Yasin Mian @ Mohammad Yaseen, son of Late Alijan Mian, Resident of Village- Bhirkhi Dakhilwari, Andar Nagar Parishad Ward No.24, P.s.- Madhepura, District- Madhepura.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. Md. Rafique Son of Late Md. Faqeer alias Kurai Mian

2. Md. Sahrab

3. Md. Kurban Ali

4. Md. Mursheed

5. Md. Naseem

6. Md. Afzal

7. Md. Hasim All Son of Md. Rafique

8. Bibi Chadni, D/o Md. Rafique, Wife of Md. Nizan All resident of Village- Sahugadh, Janki Tola, Ward No.3, Post- Bhagwanpur, P.S.- Madhepur, District- Madhepura.

9. Md. Salim Miyan Son of Late Alijaan Miyan Resident of VillageBhirkhi Dakhilwari, Andar Nagar Parishad Ward No.24, P.s.- Madhepura, District- Madhepura.

10. Bibi Zainat Wife of Md. Amal , D/o Late Alijaan Miyan Sakin Mauja Shahpur P.O.+P.S.- Arar Anchal- Gwalpora, District- Madhepura.

11. Bibi Umda Wife of Md. Muslim Miyan, D/o Late ALijaan Miyan Sakin Mauja Bhirkhi Dakchinnabari Andar Nagar Parishad Ward No.24, ThanaMadhepura, District- Madhepura.

12. Bibi Qari Wife of Md. Wajool, D/o Late Alijaan Miyan Sakin Mauja Sahugadh Janki Tola, P.S.- Madhepura, District- Madhepura.

13. Bibi Dasiya Wife of Md. Abbas, Sakin Mauja Bhirkhi Dakcsinnbari Andar Nagar Parishad Ward No.26, P.S.- Madhepura, District- Madhepura. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Atif Inam For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR SAHOO ORAL ORDER 12-05-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

By the impugned order dated 22.5.2015 the learned Sub Judge, Madhepura has only allowed the substitution application in T.S.No. 192 of 2010.

Patna High Court CWJC No.13151 of 2015 (2) dt.12-05-2016 2/2 From perusal of the impugned order it appears that the court below has found that sole plaintiff has already died and in his place legal representative has been substituted. Therefore, there is no question of prejudice the petitioner arises. Accordingly I find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. (Mungeshwar Sahoo, J) singh/- U