Patna High CourtC.R./7/2014dismissed

Deo Kumar Singh v. Susil Kumar Singh And ORS.

2016-10-20Mr. Justice V. Nath2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Revision No.7 of 2014 =========================================================== Deo Kumar Singh Son Of Late Jadunandan Singh Resident Of Village Bhilai, P.S. Udwantnagar, District Bhojpur .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. Susil Kumar Singh Son Of Late Sheoji Singh Resident Of Village Bhilai, P.S. Udwantnagar, District Bhojpur

2. Lalan Singh

3. Mahendra Singh

4. Janardan Singh

5. Rajendra Singh All Sons Of Late Ram Ekbal Singh Resident Of Village Bhilai, P.S. Udwantnagar, District Bhojpur .... .... Opposite Parties.

=========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. MD.IMTEYAZ AHMAD For the Respondent/s : Mr.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. NATH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 20-10-2016 Heard Mr.Imteyaz Ahmad, learned counsel for the petitioner.

By the impugned order the appellate court below has remanded the matter back for fresh consideration of the objection filed under Order 21 Rule 97 C.P.C by the opposite parties in the execution case.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has accepted that the petitioner was heard before the appellate court and after hearing the impugned order has been passed. It has, however, been submitted that the learned court below has not considered the

Patna High Court C.R. No.7 of 2014 dt.20-10-2016 facts and circumstances of the case which would show that the objection by the opposite parties in their petitions under Order 21 Rule 97 C.P.C. was vulnerable. The learned counsel for the petitioner, during the course of submission, however, has accepted that there is no jurisdictional error committed by the appellate court below while passing the impugned order.

After considering the submissions and perusal of the impugned order, this Court comes to the conclusion that no jurisdictional error has been committed by the learned court below in passing the impugned order.

The revision application, therefore, has got no merit and is accordingly, dismissed.

(V. Nath, J) Nitesh/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 13.12.2016 Transmission Date