Jharkhand High Court
Uday Shankar Paul vs M/S Sahara India Commercial ... on 26 April, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Civil Review No. 78 of 2022
-----
1. Uday Shankar Paul
2. Bani Brata Paul
3. Maya Paul
4. Binoy Krishna Paul
5. Amiya Kumar Paul ... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. M/s Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd., Lukhnow, U.P.
2. The Regional Manager, M/s Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd.,
Bokaro
3. M/s Karmayogi Grih Nirman Swalambi Sahakari Samity Ltd., Dhanbad
4. Smt. Nanda Laha
5. Smt. Krishna Dey
6. Ratna Das
7. Dhirendra Nath Dutta
8. Nimai Ch. Dutta
9. Krishnendu Shekhar Ch. Dutta
10.Swarup Kr. Dutta
11.Narain Ch. Dutta
12.Jiwan Chandra Dutta
13.Smt. Chanchala Kumari
14.M/s A to Z Properties through its Proprietor Smt. Chanchala Kumari
15.Jai Prakash Roy
16.M/s Bhavesh Commotrade Pvt. Ltd. through its Director Triloki Singh
17.The State of Jharkhand
18.Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad
19. Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro-cum-Regional director, JIADA, Bokaro
20.M/s Asarfi Hospital Limited through one of its Directors Udai Pratap Singh
. ... .... Opp. Parties
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Kumar Gupta, Advocate
Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Praveen Akhouri, S.C. (Mines)-I
Mr. D. K. Roy, A.C. to. S.C. (Mines)-I
For the Respondent-BIADA: Mr. Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate
Mr. Shivam Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent No.20 : Mr. Ashish Kumar Shekhar, Advocate
-----
C.A.V. ON: 11.04.2023 PRONOUNCED ON 26/ 04/ 2023
I.A. No.11058 of 2022
I.A. No.11058 of 2022 has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation
Act for condoning the delay of 48 days in filing the instant review petition.
Having been satisfied with the grounds taken in the interlocutory
application, delay in filing the instant petition, is hereby, condoned.
I.A. No.11058 of 2022 is allowed.
Civil Review No. 78 of 2022
1. The instant review petition has been filed by Plaintiffs/petitioners for
review of portion of the judgment dated 30.06.2022 passed by this Court in F.A.
No. 43 of 2012 by which while dismissing the appeal, this Court in para 86 at
page 69 of the said judgment directed exclusion of certain plots mentioned
therein on the ground that the said plots did not figure in 'M' Form (Ext. 10
Series).
2. The Plaintiffs filed Title Suit No.76 of 2006 originally against O.P.
Nos.1 to 3 i.e, M/s Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd, & M/s Karmyogi
Grih Nirman Swablami Sahkarita Samiti inter alia for declaration of right, title,
interest and possession over the lands described in Schedule A below in
accordance with the shares indicated therein, and for decree confirming the
plaintiff's and proforma defendant's possession over Schedule B land and for
permanent injunction.
3. The Title Suit No.76 of 2006 of the plaintiff was decreed vide judgment
dated 15.12.2011 and the same has been confirmed by this Court vide judgment
dated 30.06.2022 in First Appeal No. 43 of 2012. However, this Court refrained
from affirming the declaration of title and possession with respect to five plots
of Khata no.65, Khata no.65, Khewat 52, and one plot in Khata no.75, Khewat
57 of Schedule A.
4. The instant review petition has been filed on the plea that out of the five
plots that has been excluded there is error apparent on the face of record with
respect to the following three plots which do figure in the M-forms and by
oversight have been left out. The following plots that have been claimed to be
left out and do figure in the M forms issued in the name of Rabindra Nath Paul
(Ext -10/D) are as under:
a. Plot no.641 of Khata no.65 Khewat 52 of item no.2 of Schedule A
area 0.42 acre
b. Plot no.625 of Khata no.66 Khewat 52 of item no.1 of Schedule A,
area 1.67 acre
5. Further, another plot that has been claimed to be left out and figure in the
M form issued in the name of Satya Narayan Paul (Ext-10) is as under:
Plot No.679 of Khata No.65 Khewat 52 of item 3 of Schedule A area
0.07 acre
6. Mr. Pravin Akhouri, learned counsel on behalf of the State has raised
objection to the review petition on the ground that it touches the merit of the
case and cannot be considered in the review petition.
7. It is settled position of law that a review petition has a limited purpose
and cannot be allowed as "an appeal in disguise". Under Section 152 CPC,
clerical or arithmetical mistakes in judgments, decrees or orders or errors arising
therein from any accidental slip or omissions may at any time be corrected by
the Court either of its own motion or on the application of any of the parties.
8. Here in the instant case, the claim of title of the plaintiff/petitioners is
based inter alia on the M Forms issued with respect to the plots of land claimed
by the plaintiff.
9. The M Forms (Exhibit 10 series) which are rent rolls issued by the
State after vesting of intermediary interest in the year 1956 under the BLR Act,
was accepted by the Trial Court as well as this Court as discussed in para 84 &
85 of the judgment.
10. Whether the plots claimed to be part of the M Forms duly adduced
into evidence, is not a question on merit but is ascertainment of the plots
excluded to be part of the M Forms or not.
11. On perusal of Exhibit 10E, I find that Plot No. 641 of Khata No.65
area 0.42 acre does not figure and accordingly, the claim regarding it, is not
sustainable and is rejected.
12. Plot No. 679 as per the schedule of the plaint, is under Khata No.65
and there is no such corresponding plot in this Khata which has been marked as
Exhibit 10 and therefore, claim pertaining to it is also rejected.
13. The claim over Plot No.625 of Khata No.66, Khewat 52 of Item No.1
of Schedule A, area 1.67 acre, does find mention in Exhibit 10E and there is an
apparent omission in the judgment to exclude this plot in the judgment and
decree passed by this Court in the First Appeal.
14. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstance, the petitioner is entitled to
the reliefs as claimed for with respect to Plot No.625 of Khata No.66, Khewat
The review petition is accordingly, partly allowed. Pending I.A., if any,
is also disposed of.
(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi
Dated the 26th April, 2023
AFR / Anit
