Satin Mahto vs The State Of Jharkhand & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 1392 Jhar

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                           (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)
                             SA. No. 470 of 2017
                                  ......

       Satin Mahto                                        ...... Appellant
                                   Versus
       The State of Jharkhand & Ors.                         ......Respondents

       CORAM:        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO
                     (Through : Video Conferencing)
                                 ......
       For the Appellant                   : Mr. J.J. Sanga, Advocate
       For the Respondents-State           : Mr. Ravi Prakash Mishra, AC to AAG-II
                                   -----
04/Dated: 18/03/2021.

Heard, learned counsel for the appellant.

It appears that defect nos.1 to 8 as pointed out vide Stamp Reporting dated 03.11.2017 have not been removed.

Defect nos.1 to 8 are as follows:-

Defect no.1- C.C. of judgment of T.S. no.42/05 may be filed with A.F. of Rs.10/-.

Defect no.2- Enrolment no. of Ld. Adv. Is missing at certificate. Defect no.3- The word 'Rule' is missing is 3rd para of certificate. Defect No.4- The word 'Annexure' may be deleted at the top of page no.29 as the c.c. of impugned order/judgment may not be made Annexure.

Defect no.5- A.F. of Rs.15/- may be given for the c.c. of decree u/a. Defect no.6- C.C. of decree of T.S. No.42/05 is handwritten, as such true type copy of the same may be filed.

Defect no.7- The word 'application' may be amended as 'appeal' at provision of law portion of the emo and at synopsis page(i).

Defect no.8- Prayer for stay may be deleted from the prayer portion of the memo and if required a separate I.A. may be filed with the prayer of stay.

Learned counsel for the appellant has prayed for four weeks time to remove the defects.

Considering the same, 30 days' time after physical court starts is granted to the appellants to remove the defects, failing which, the instant Second Appeal shall stand dismissed without further reference to a Bench, as the appeal is of the year, 2017.

Office is directed to reflect the name of learned counsel, Mr. Sachin Kumar, AAG-II in place of learned counsel for the respondents, Mr. Atanu Banerjee in the Cause List.

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