Jharkhand High Court
Anil Kumar vs Anima Prasad on 3 August, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
C.M.P. No. 700 of 2023
------
Anil Kumar .... .... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. Anima Prasad
2. Anita Prasad
3. Anjana Gupta .... .... .... Respondents
------
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Singh, Advocate
For the Opp. Parties :
------
Order No. 03 Dated- 03.08.2023
1. The instant civil miscellaneous application has been filed by the
petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing order
dated 24.05.2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Sr. Div. - IX, Dhanbad
in Original Suit No. 409 of 2019 whereby and whereunder, the learned trial
court has been pleased to reject the prayer of the petitioner for stay of the
proceeding of the suit till the disposal of letter of Administration Case No.
6 of 2022 (Corresponding to O.S. No. 8 of 2022) and also prayed for stay of
further proceeding of Original Suit No. 409 of 2019 till the disposal of L.A.
Case No. 6 of 2022.
2. It is submitted that the Original Suit No. 409 of 2019 was instituted
by the respondents before the learned Civil Judge, Sr. Div. No. 1, Dhanbad
against the petitioner and others for following reliefs:-
(i) Registered Sale Deed No. 1653 dated 01.04.2019 executed by
the defendant nos. 1 and 2 in favour of the defendant nos. 3
and 4 is illegal, invalid, inoperative and null and void and a
sham transaction and liable to be cancelled.
(ii) The defendant nos. 3 and 4 did not acquire any right, title
and interest in Schedule "A" property by execution of
aforesaid sale deed.
(iii) The possession of the schedule "A" property may be restored
back to the plaintiffs by evicting the defendants nos. 3 and 4
any other relief or reliefs which may be deemed fit by the
court along with the cost of the suit.
3. According to the plaintiff late Sakaldeo Prasad was exclusive owner
of the properties described in the Schedule - A of the plaint who died on
25.04.2012 leaving behind his two sons namely Anil Kumar and Rajan
Prasad (defendant nos. 1 and 2) and three daughters namely Anita Prasad,
Anima Prasad and Anjana Gupta (plaintiffs) who jointly inherited the said
property after the death of their father.
4. It is further averred that the suit schedule A property comprising of
a triple storied building wherein occupation of tenants, who are proforma
defendants to this suit the plaintiff recently came to know that the
defendant nos. 1 and 2 have transferred the entire scheduled A to the
defendant nos. 3 and 4 deprived the plaintiffs of their legitimate share in
the said property. The petitioner/defendant nos. 1 and 2 in their written
statement have pleaded that Late Sakaldeo Prasad died in intested rather
he has executed registered will dated 13.08.2011 whereby the suit
scheduled A property and other properties left by the deceased have been
bequeathed in favour of the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 alone. The
petitioner/defendant nos. 1 and 2 have also filed a case of latter of
Administration Suit No. 6 of 2019 before the court of learned Principal
District Judge, Dhanbad which is at of dismissal and fixed for final
arguments.
5. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that
since the judgment of letter of Administration case would simply effect the
maintainability and contests of the Original Suit No. 409 of 2019 and the
petitioner could not adduce evidence judgment to the pendency case
administration case and the alleged will shall be required to be proved in
the original suit also. The petitioner is pressurized for adducing their
evidence for earlier dismissal of the Original Suit No. 409 of 2019. Hence,
the filed application under Section 151 CPC for stay of the proceeding till
the disposal of the letter of Administration Case No. 6 of 2022 which has
been rejected by the learned court below on wrong motion and without
appreciating the entire impact of entire case on each other. Hence this case
is fit to be heard on merits and further proceeding of the Original Suit No.
409 of 2019 is fit to be stayed in the interest of justice.
6. Considering the above facts and points of arguments and nature of
both suits and its impact on each other cases, the case requires to be herd
on merits.
7. Let notice be issued to the respondents for which requisites etc.
under registered cover with A/D as well as under ordinary process must
be filed within a week.
8. The further proceeding of Original Suit No. 409 of 2019 would
remain stayed, till further orders.
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
Umesh/-
