Purnima Devi & Others vs Sitaram Sao & Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 2737 Jhar

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                      (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)
                         S. A. No. 545 of 2017
                                ......

Purnima Devi & Others ........... Appellants Versus Sitaram Sao & Others ........ Respondents

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

For the Appellants : Mr. Samir Kumar Lall, Advocate.

 For the Respondents      :
                                 .......
 05/05.08.2021

The second appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 30.06.2017 and decree signed on 11.07.2017 passed by learned District Judge-II, Seraikella-Kharsawan in Title Appeal No. 19 of 2011, whereby the judgment dated 28.02.2011 and decree dated 09.03.2011 passed by learned Additional Munsif, Seraikella- Kharsawan in Title Suit No. 05/2009 has been reversed.

It appears that office has pointed out defect no. 4 vide S.R. dated 02.01.2018 has not been removed, which is as follows:- Defect 4 - Page no. 16 to 29 are handwritten true type copy of the same may be filed.

Further, office note reveals that defect nos. 1, 5 & 6 as pointed out vide further S.R. dated 17.10.2020 have not been removed and deficit court fee of Rs. 1116/- has not been paid.

Defect nos. 1, 5 & 6 are as follows:-

Defect no. 1 - Name of appellant no. 6, 10, 13 may be verified and given as per c.c. of decree under appeal. However, their execution at vakalatnama may also be verified. As, their names does not appear at decree under appeal.

Defect no. 5 - Appellant no. 9, 19, 20, 21 has not executed vakalatnama. Defect no. 6 - Appellant no. 11, 12 & 17 of this memo has appeared as minor at decree under appeal. At memo it is not mentioned. If they attained the majority. Then vakalatnama on their behalf may be filed. Otherwise at address portion they may be represented through his legal guardian.

Learned counsel for the appellants has prayed for two weeks' time after the physical court starts to remove the defects and also to deposit deficit court fee.

Considering the same, two weeks' time after the physical court starts is granted to appellants to remove the defects and also to deposit deficit court fee as pointed out by the office, failing which, this appeal shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Bench, as the appeal is of the year 2017.

(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.) Sunil/-