Balbir Singh vs Rajdeep Kaur
2022 Latest Caselaw 4697 Jhar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                      C. M. P. No. 188 of 2020
                            -----

1. Balbir Singh

2. Gurdeep Singh

3. Jagdeep Singh

4. Gurprit Singh

5. Krit Jeet Singh

6. Rajpal Singh

7. Jagpal Singh

8. Smt. Balvinder Kaur

9. Manprit Singh

10.Ms. Harprit Kaur ... .... Petitioners Versus

1. Rajdeep Kaur

2. Balbinder Kaur

3. Roshan Singh

4. Amardip Singh

5. Puja Kaur

6. Satpal Singh

7. Rajender Pal Singh

8. Pyara Singh

9. Kulwant Singh

10.Deepak Gill

11.Sri Hari Om Kumar Mutraja

12.Sri Mangal Singh

13.Gaganprit Singh

14.Sanna Das

15.Jayshmin

16.Harbindar Kaur

17.Paramjit Kaur

18.Ravinderjeet Kaur

19.Jaswant Singh

20.Smt. Kashmir Kaur

21.Smt. Sarabjeet Kaur

22.Smt. Jasbinder Kaur

23.Smt. Jaspal Kaur

24.Jaspal Singh

25.Sarabjeet Singh @ Roushan ... .... Opp. Parties

-----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

-----

For the Petitioners : Mr. Afaque Rashidi, Advocate For the Opp. Parties :

-----

Oral Order 05 / Dated : 23.11.2022

1. The instant civil misc. petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the order dated 24.04.2019 passed in Misc. Case No. 07 of 2016 whereby and whereunder, the petition of opposite party no. 1 dated 10.02.2017 has been allowed for substitution of plaintiff Dharam Kaur who died on 18.8.2016.

2. The brief fact leading to the present petition is that one Dharam Kaur filed a partition suit bearing Title (Partition) Suit No. 55 of 1988 for partition of share of the schedule property which was claimed to be joint property of the plaintiff, her sister Dharam Kaur @ Baljit Kaur, defendant no. 3, her mother Smt. Dewan Kaur, defendant nos. 4 to 8 and brothers.

3. The suit was decreed vide the judgment dated 07.10.1994 and F.A. No. 05 of 1995(R) was also dismissed vide judgment dated 16.01.2014.

4. On 29.02.2016 Dharam Kaur @ Baljit Kaur filed a petition for recall of the order dated 10.03.2014 passed in Title (Partition) Suit No. 55 of 1988 and in view of the order of stay passed in F.A. No. 05 of 1995(R), the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Jamshedpur registered Misc. Case. No. 07 of 2016 in reference to Title (Partition) Suit No. 55 of 1988 on the basis of the petition filed by Dharam Kaur to restore the original file. She had filed a petition for appointment of Pleader Commissioner but during the pendency of the said petition she died on 18.08.2016 leaving daughter namely, Sukhdip Kaur and Rajdeep Kaur and legal heirs of her predeceased son Jaspal Singh. Finally daughter of applicant Dharam Kaur filed a petition for substitution on 10.02.2017 with a limitation petition for condoning the delay for filing the substitution petition.

5. By order dated 24.04.2019 the substitution petition was allowed and the instant petition has been filed against the said order.

6. It is submitted by the learned Counsel that the substitution petition has been allowed, although no petition for condonation of delay had been filed. No further point has been urged before this Court while moving the instant petition.

7. In para 15 of the instant civil miscellaneous petition it is stated that a limitation petition dated 5.4.2018 filed in Misc. Case No.2016 had been filed by Rajdeep Kaur for the substitution of the legal heirs of Dharam Kaur. This falsifies the submission made on behalf of the petitioner that no condonation petition had been filed.

Under the aforesaid facts and circumstance of the case, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order.

The Civil Miscellaneous Petition accordingly stands dismissed.

(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) AKT