State Of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) ... vs Janki Sah @ Singh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3977 Jhar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                      S.A. No.548 of 2003
                                ------

State of Bihar (now Jharkhand) through Chief Secretary & Another .... .... .... Appellants Versus Janki Sah @ Singh .... .... .... Respondent

------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

------

For the Appellants : Mr. Praveen Akhauri, SC (MINES-I) For the Intervener : Mr. Suraj Singh, Advocate For the Resp. No.1 : Mr. O. P. Singh No.1, Advocate

------

Order No.08 Dated- 27/09/2022 I.A. No.1783 of 2021 Heard the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the intervener- Puran Singh submits that this interlocutory application has been filed with a prayer to implead the applicant as respondent No.2 in the instant Second Appeal No.548 of 2003.

3. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the intervener/applicant that the brother of the applicant filed Title Suit No.47/87 which was dismissed by judgment dated 04.06.1990 by the Sub- Judge-1st Dhanbad and on being aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the brother of the applicant preferred Title Appeal No.41/90 before the court of Additional District Judge, F.T.C.-II, Dhanbad and the said Title Appeal No.41/90 was allowed vide judgment dated 28.01.2003 and on being aggrieved by the said judgment and decree dated 28.01.2003, the State has preferred the instant Second Appeal being Second Appeal No.548 of 2003. It is next submitted that the applicant/intervener being the brother of the respondent in this second appeal, is entitled to be impleaded as necessary party in the instant Second Appeal being Second Appeal No.548 of 2003. It is also submitted that the property in question is the outcome of the ancestral property of the respondent and Title Suit No.47/87 and Title Appeal No.41/90 which were filed by the brother of the applicant with regard to the ancestral property.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant/intervener undertakes that the applicant/intervener will not take any plea inconsistent with the plea of sole respondent either taken by him in the suit or in the appeal before the learned first appellate court and undertakes to abide by the judgment to be passed in this appeal.

5. Considering the aforesaid facts, the prayer for intervener- Puran Singh to be impleaded as respondent No.2 is allowed subject to the condition that he will not take any plea inconsistent with the plea of sole respondent either taken by him in the suit or in the appeal before the learned first appellate court and he will abide by the judgment to be passed in this appeal.

6. Mr. Suraj Singh- learned counsel, has filed power on behalf of intervener- Puran Singh.

7. This interlocutory application stands disposed of.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) S.A. No.548 of 2003 Perusal of the record reveals that vide order dated 04.07.2022 prayer for time was allowed as the last chance and today also learned counsel for the appellants again prays for time.

Prayer for time is allowed subject to payment of cost by the appellants of Rs.1,000/- each to both the respondents through their counsel appearing in the record within six weeks from the date of this order, failing which, this appeal shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Bench.

List this appeal after eight weeks in case the appellants file the proof of payment of cost Rs.1,000/- each by the appellants to both the respondents through their counsel appearing in the record within six weeks from the date of this order.

    Animesh/                               (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)