Rajani Oraonin vs Parikshit Mahto Alias Haradhan ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 2633 Jhar

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                             (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)
                               SA. No. 479 of 2017
                                    ......

Rajani Oraonin ...... Appellant Versus Parikshit Mahto alias Haradhan Mahto & Ors. ......Respondents

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

        For the Appellant                : Mr. Srijit Choudhary, Advocate
        For the Respondents              :
                                 -----
04/Dated: 29/07/2021.

Heard, learned counsel for the appellant. It appears that defect nos.1, 4, 7, 10 and 11 as pointed out vide Stamp Reporting dated 07.10.2017 have not been removed including court fee paid is short by Rs.1525.65/-.

Defect nos.1, 4, 7, 10 and 11 are as follows:- Defect no.1- Cage Collumn is missing in c.c. of judgment of T.A. 09/1992. It may be send to court below for necessary correction after obtaining order.

Defect no.4- Respondent no.9 of memo is not party in c.c. of decree u/a.

Defect no.7- P.O. name of respondent nos.1 to 8 may be corrected in memo.

Defect no.10- C.C. of decree u/a is handwritten. True typed copy may be filed.

Defect no.11- Cause of action para is missing. It may be filed through supplementary affidavit.

Office is directed to send the c.c. of judgment of T.A. 09/1992 before the court below for necessary correction, so as to obtain the same after necessary correction within a period of four weeks.

In the meantime, learned counsel for the appellant is directed to remove the remaining defects including filing of deficit court fee of Rs.1525.65/-.

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