Dholan Mandal v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.1181 of 2018 ====================================================== Dholan Mandal Son of Medo Mandal @ Medi Mandal, Resident of VillageRangra, P.S.-Rangra Chok Gopalpur District-Bhagalpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

Anchal Adhikari, Gopalpur, Sub-Division Navgachia, District Bhagalpur. 3.

Most. Rukmini Devi, Wife of Late Shiv Sah.

4.

Lalan Sah Son of Late Shiv Sah.

5.

Jai prakash Sah @ Jichho Sah Son of Late Shiv Sah 6.

Subash Sah Son of Late Shiv Sah 7.

Ramesh Sah Son of Late Shiv Sah.

8.

Lilmi Devi Daughter of Late Shiv Sah.

9.

Parni Devi Daughter of Late Shiv Sah.

12.

Urmila Devi Wife of Medo Mandal @ Medi Mandal. 13.

Chhopi Mandal Son of Nedo Mandal @ Medi Mandal. 14.

Nindak Mandal, Son of Medo Mandal @ Medi Mandal, 15.

Bhutan Mandal Son of Medo Mandal @ Medi Mandal, Respondent nos 11 to 15 are Resident of Village-Rangra, P.S. Rangra Chowk Gopalpur DistrictBhagalpur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sunil Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Raj Kishore Roy- Gp18 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 10-08-2022 Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 11.06.2018 passed in Title Suit No. 61 / 2001 by which an application filed by the petitioner for his impleadment under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the CPC has been rejected.

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.1181 of 2018(2) dt.10-08-2022 2/3 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present suit has been filed for declaration of right, title and interest upon the suit property as well as correction of wrong entry made in the survey khatiyan. The subject matter of the land involved in the present Title Suit No. 61 / 2001 are plot nos. 3080 & 3081. The plaintiff- respondent has made his claim against the defendant 1st set i.e. State authority. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has filed a petition for his impleadment as defendant in the present suit on the ground that the petitioner is having his claim to the extent of 02 decimals on plot no. 3080 & 03 decimals on plot no. 3081, which are the subject matter of the present suit and by the impugned order the learned trial court has rejected the application for his impleadment.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the impugned order. It appears that for his independent claim upon the plot nos. 3080 & 3081 to the extent of 05 decimals the petitioner has already filed a separate suit bearing T.S. No. 48 of 2015.

In view of the fact that petitioner has already filed a separate suit for his claim upon the aforesaid plot nos. 3080 & 3081, therefore in my opinion he is not a proper party in the

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.1181 of 2018(2) dt.10-08-2022 3/3 present suit and it cannot be said that in absence of the petitioner the present suit cannot be effectively decided. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in this application.

Accordingly, this civil miscellaneous application stands dismissed.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) praful/- U