Uddhab Singh Babu & ANR v. Hemanta Kr. Singh Manki

SA- 312 of 2009 08.01.2025 Item no.01 Court No.50 Uddhab Singh Babu & Anr. Vs.

Hamenta Kr. Singh Manki Ld. Advocate Mr. Uttiya Ray appears for appellant.

Ld.

Counsel for the appellant submits that the earlier T.C.R was called for by the Hon'ble Court and the same was found complete. But, when the said T.C.R was again called for, by the Hon'ble Court, in terms of the office report, the same was found incomplete.

Ld. Counsel thus, submits that the T.C.R may be treated as complete.

Perused the office report dated 03.01.2025.

It transpires from the office report that in due compliance with the direction of the Hon'ble Court dated 29.03.2023, six files of T.C.R in connection with Title Appeal No. 118/2001 and Title Suit No.

91/88 have been received vide memo dated 03.09.2022 from the court of Ld.

Additional District Judge, 1st Court, Purulia.

On examination of the same it is found that Exhibit-C and Exhibit-E do not contain the signature of the concerned P.O. Otherwise the T.C.R is complete.

In view of the submission made before this court, it appears that vide order dated 08.03.2017, the instant T.C.R was received in connection with Title Appeal No. 118/2001 and Title Suit No. 91/88 and the same was found as complete. But, on careful examination of the T.C.R as received on 03.09.2022, it appears that Exhibit-C and Exhibit-E in connection

with Title Suit No. 91/99 do not bear the signature of the concerned P.O which requires immediate rectification by the concerned court.

Hence, let the T.C.R in connection with Title Appeal No. 118/2001 and Title Suit No. 91/88 be immediately sent back to the court of Ld. Civil Judge, Jr. Divn, Purulia through the court of Ld.

Additional District Jude, 1st Court, Purulia for removal of defect as indicated hereinabove with a direction to retransmit the same immediately within two weeks from the date of receiving the order.

(Nabanita Ray) Registrar Administration (L&OM)