Jitendra Nath Burdhan And Ors vs Sita Ram Sah
2021 Latest Caselaw 2726 Jhar

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                         (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)
                           SA. No. 434 of 2017
                                ......

Jitendra Nath Burdhan and Ors. ...... Appellants Versus Sita Ram Sah ......Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO (Through : Video Conferencing) ......

For the Appellants : Mr. Jitesh Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. S.N. Das, Advocate Mr. Om Prakash Singh, Advocate

-----

08/Dated: 05/08/2021.

Heard, learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Jitesh Kumar and

learned counsel, Mr. S.N. Das assisted by learned counsel for the respondent, Mr. Om Prakash Singh.

Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the Second Appeal has been admitted on 15.01.2019 against the judgment of reversal, which was passed by learned Principal District Judge, Sahibganj in T. Appeal No.19 of 2016 on the following substantial question of law "Whether sada adoption deed is permissible in the eyes of law, which is not taken into consideration by the 1st Appellate Court?"

Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that since the appeal has been admitted and respondent are residing in the dual house, which requires some repairing works during rainy season, as such, respondent is changing the nature of the suit by making permanent construction by cement and iron rod, which may be restrained by this Court during pendency of the appeal.

Mr. S.N. Das appearing for the respondent has filed reply to the I.A. stating therein that it is dwelling house, which is used for residential purpose as well as business, but because of the lapse of time periodical maintenance is necessary during rainy and summer season, as such, respondent may not be restrained from making necessary construction, but without creating any third party right over the suit land.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, and on the basis of the materials available on the record, it appears that appeal has already been admitted, which is still pending before this Court, as such, the respondent is at liberty to make temporary repairing in the house after

taking leave of this Court. There shall not be any permanent construction over the suit land and the third party's right cannot be created by the respondent during pendency of the appeal.

However, the parties are at liberty to make such prayer, if necessity arises.

The respondent is at liberty to file an application for taking leave of this Court showing what type of repair he wants to make over the suit land.

I.A. No.3055 of 2021 stands disposed of.

(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.) sandeep/R.S.