Jharkhand High Court
Suresh Mahato vs The State Of Jharkhand on 14 August, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
F.A. No. 76 of 2022
Suresh Mahato ...... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ......... Respondent
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
For the Appellant : Mr. Arbind Kr. Sinha, Adv.
For the Respondent : Mr. K.K.Bhatt, AC to SC I
05 / 14.08.2023 I.A. no. 7966 of 2022
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
this interlocutory application has been filed with a
prayer to permit the sole appellant to pursue this
appeal on behalf of his deceased father- Banbihari
Mahto who died on 20.01.2017 leaving behind the
appellant as his only legal representative, hence, it is
submitted that the appellant be permitted to pursue
this appeal on behalf of his father.
Prayer is allowed.
The appellant is permitted to pursue this
appeal on behalf of his deceased father.
This interlocutory application is disposed of
accordingly.
(ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)
I.A. no. 3932 of 2023
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
this interlocutory application has been filed with a
prayer to exempt the appellant from filing the certified
copy of the judgment dated 29th March, 2012 passed
by learned Civil Judge II (Sr. Div.), Seraikella in
Reference Case no. 08 of 1989 to 10 of 1989 and 01 of
1995 as the same has already been filed in FA no. 152
of 2012, which has arisen out of same common
judgment and which appeal has been filed in respect
of Reference Case no. 08 of 1989 and this appeal has
been filed in respect of Reference Case no. 09 of 1989
and the photocopy of the said certified copy of the
award, has been filed in this case.
Considering the aforesaid, the appellant is
exempted from filing the certified copy of the
judgment dated 29th March, 2012 passed by learned
Civil Judge II (Sr. Div.), Seraikella in Reference Case
no. 08 of 1989 to 10 of 1989 and 01 of 1995 as the same
has already been filed in FA no. 152 of 2012.
This interlocutory application is disposed of
accordingly.
(ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)
I.A. no. 3927 of 2023
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
this interlocutory application has been filed with a
prayer to condone the delay of 2964 days in filing this
appeal. It is further submitted that the appellant was
under wrong impression that the FA No. 152 of 2012
has been filed jointly against the entire judgment,
involving all the four reference cases which were
disposed of by the common judgment impugned in
this appeal, but later on, it came to the notice of the
appellant that the FA No. 152 of 2012 has been filed
only in respect of Reference Case of 08 of 1989 and the
same resulted in delay in filing this appeal. It is then
submitted that the appellant has very good grounds to
agitate in this appeal and the delay caused is neither
deliberate nor intentional and unless the delay is
condoned, the appellant will be highly prejudiced.
Considering the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the case, the delay in filing the
appeal is condoned.
This interlocutory application is disposed of
accordingly.
(ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)
F.A. No. 76 of 2022
This appeal will be heard.
Admit.
Call for the Lower Court Records.
It is jointly submitted by learned counsel for the
appellant and learned counsel for the respondent that
out of the common judgment, FA No. 152 of 2012, FA
No. 76 of 2022 and FA No. 75 of 2022 have been filed,
out of which, FA No. 152 of 2012 is in the roster of a
co-ordinate Bench.
The Registry is directed to place the matter
before Hon'ble the Chief Justice to consider listing of
all the said First Appeals before one Bench, as they
have arisen out of same common judgment.
(ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)
Smita/-
