Narayan Oraon & Ors vs Randsi Oraon & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 3885 Jhar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
             S.A. No. 121 of 2004

                                    ------

   Narayan Oraon & Ors.                          ....   ....   ....    Appellant
                                    Versus
   Randsi Oraon & Ors.                           ....   ....   .... Respondents
                                    ------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

------

For the Appellants : Mr. Niraj Kishore, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Sachidanadan Das, Advocate

------

Order No.14 Dated- 22.09.2022 I.A. No.8754 of 2022 Heard the parties.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that this interlocutory application has been filed with a prayer to substitute the legal representatives of the deceased respondent no.4- Budhwa Oraon. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that the deceased respondent no.4- Budhwa Oraon died on 10.09.2020 leaving behind his only two legal representatives whose names, parentage and addresses have been mentioned at paragraph no.5 of this interlocutory application. It is next submitted that because of Covid-19 Pandemic, the appellants could not know about the death of the respondent immediately after his death and the same resulted in delay in filing the petition for substitution. It is further submitted that unless the delay is condoned and the abatement if any, is set aside and the prayer to substitute the only two legal representatives of the deceased respondent no.4 is allowed, the appellants will be highly prejudiced.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the delay in filing the petition for substitution is condoned and the abatement, if any, is set aside and the prayer to substitute the only two legal representatives of the deceased respondent no.4 whose names, parentage and addresses have been mention in paragraph -5 of the interlocutory application as respondent nos. 4 (a) and 4 (b) is allowed.

Registry is directed to incorporate the names, parentage and addresses of the said respondent nos. 4 (a) and 4 (b) in the cause title of the appeal memo with red ink and mention the word 'dead' against the name of the deceased respondent no.4.

This interlocutory application is disposed of accordingly.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) I.A. No.6133 of 2022 Heard the parties.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that this interlocutory application has been filed with a prayer to extend the earlier stay order dated 23.11.2007 granted in favour of the appellants in this appeal and setting aside the order dated 02.03.2022 passed by learned Civil Judge, Sr. Division-II, Gumla in Partition Proceeding Case No.28 of 1999.

It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that vide order dated 23.11.2007 in this appeal, this Court pleased to stay the signing of the final decree during the pendency of the second appeal. It is next submitted that the appellants complied all the conditions before the learned court below with regard to furnishing of security bond for immovable property valued at Rs.25,000/-. It is further submitted that the said stay order has never been vacated by this Court and the learned Civil Judge, Sr. Division-II, Gumla relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in (2018) 16 SCC 299 and in the absence of any specific extension of stay order by this court passed in respect of Partition Proceeding Case No.28 of 1999; the learned Civil Judge, Sr. Division-II, Gumla vide its order dated 02.03.2022 has erroneously observed that the final decree was stayed by this Court subject to furnishing of security bond by the appellants but the said security bond has not been furnished by the appellants. Hence, the learned trial court directed both the parties for hearing on the report of the survey knowing pleader commissioner.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that he has no objection if the learned trial court proceeds with the final decree.

Under such circumstances, as the appellants have no objection if the learned trial court proceeds with the final decree proceeding, the learned Civil Judge, Sr. Division-II, Gumla is directed to proceed with the final decree proceeding expeditiously keeping in view this is a suit of the year 1999.

Let a copy of this order be transmitted to the learned Civil Judge, Sr. Division-II, Gumla forthwith.

This interlocutory application stands disposed of accordingly.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) S.A. No. 121 of 2004 Issue notice to the respondent nos. 4 (a) and 4 (b). The appellants are directed to file requisites for service of notice on the respondent nos. 4 (a) and 4 (b) by registered post with A/D as well as under ordinary process within four weeks failing which; this appeal shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Bench.

Rule is made returnable within six weeks.

List this appeal after receipt of the service report of the notice issued to the respondent nos. 4 (a) and 4 (b).

Sonu-Gunjan/-                         (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)