Narendra Bahadur vs Sushil Kumar And 9 Ors
2013 Latest Caselaw 321 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 21
 
Case :- CIVIL REVISION No. - 30 of 2004
 
Petitioner :- Narendra Bahadur
 
Respondent :- Sushil Kumar And 9 Ors
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Avadhesh Kumar
 

 
Hon'ble Sibghat Ullah Khan,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

O.S. No.65 of 1996, which was filed for partition by some family members against the other family members was decided on 18.05.2002 by Civil Judge (J.D.), Mohammadi, Lakhimpur Kheri. Plaintiffs were declared to be owners of half share and preliminary decree was directed to be prepared. Against the said decree, appeal was filed being Civil Appeal No.79 of 2002, Shushil Kumar and others Vs. Kamlesh Kumar and others. In the appeal, applicant filed an application for impleadment under Order I Rule 10, C.P.C., which was rejected on 10.02.2004 by A.D.J./ Special Judge, Kheri. The said order has been challenged through this revision.

The court below rightly held that in the application itself it was mentioned that the land had been given by the applicant to Shaym Bihari his nephew orally for constructing the house and the house had been constructed. Copy of the application is Annexure-8 to the affidavit filed in support of stay application. If the allegation made in the application is taken to be correct, Shaym Bihari acquires right of an irrevocable licencee and applicant's right is lost. The lower appellate court also did not believe the assertion of the applicant that he was not aware about the pendency of the suit. I do not find least error in the impugned order. Moreover, in this revision no stay order has been granted, hence appeal itself may have been decided by now.

Accordingly, there is no merit in the revision, hence it is dismissed.

Order Date :- 04.04.2013

NLY