Md. Sahjahan v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

BEFORE THE LOK ADALAT HELD AT HIGH COURT PATNA CWJC No. 15186 of 2016 1.Petitioner :Md. Sahjahan son of Late Malli Razak Resident of Village-Dubha, P.O.- Mahmadipur, P.S.-Mohididdin Nagar, District-Samastipur 1.Respondent :The State of Bihar, through the principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 2.Respondent :The Certificate Officer, Samastipur 3.Respondent :The Sub-Divisional Certificate Officer-Cum-Sub- Divisional Office, Patory, District-Samastipur 4.Respondent :The Zonal Manager, Central Bank of India, Samastipur Zone, Samastipur 5.Respondent :The Branch Manager, Central Bank of India, Madudabad Branch, Samastipur Present:- Member(Judicial) :Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah Member(Legal Profession) : Mrs. Tanuja Mishra, Advocate AWARD The dispute between the parties having been referred for determination to the Lok Adalat and the parties having compromised/ settled the case/matter, the following award is passed in terms of the settlement: Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner and Central Bank of India. Learned counsel for the State is present.

From the record, it transpires that on 11.02.2017, learned counsel for the petitioner and State were present but nobody had appeared on behalf of the Bank and thus the matter was sent back to the Court. Thereafter, on 22.04.2017 learned counsel for the State and Bank were present but learned counsel for the petitioner was not present and the matter was directed to be placed before the next Lok Adalat. In the next Lok Adalat n 09.09.2017, nobody had appeared on behalf of the petitioner but learned counsel for the Central Bank of India and State were present and it was informed by learned counsel for the Bank that the matter was amicably settled between the petitioner and the Bank but due to no one appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the matter was again directed to be listed before the next Lok Adalat.

Thus, the matter has come finally before the present Lok Adalat. In view of the fact that learned counsel for the Central Bank of India had taken the stand, upon instruction, that matter had been amicably settled between the petitioner and the Bank on the last date itself and today nobody appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the matters seem to have been settled between the parties and accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed off. The parties are informed that the court fee, if any, paid by any of them shall be refunded.

___________________ Petitioner/Petitioner's representative ___________________ Respondent/Respondent's representative Member(Judicial) Member(Legal Profession) 10-02-2018 (Seal of the Authority)