Kishor Sao & Ors vs Pyari Singh & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 856 Jhar

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                       S.A. No. 329 of 2017

         Kishor Sao & Ors.                    .........      Appellants

                                    Versus

         Pyari Singh & Ors.                   .........     Respondents

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

For the Appellants : Mr. P.K.Sinha , Adv. For the Respondents : Mr. P.K.Verma , Adv.

07 / 22.02.2023 Heard the parties.

Perusal of the record reveals that vide order dated 03.01.2023, the prayer for time was allowed to the appellants as the last chance.

Learned counsel for the appellants again prays for time.

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

In case the appellants produce the proof of payment of cost of Rs. 1,000/- by the appellants to the respondents through the learned counsel for the respondents appearing in the record within four weeks, list this appeal after four weeks.

(ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) Smita/-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI S.A. No. 251 of 2017

Nagendra Mandal ......... Appellant

Versus

Droupadi Devi ......... Respondent

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

For the Appellant : Mr. Aashish Kumar , Adv.

08 / 22.02.2023 Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.

This appeal will be heard on the following substantial question of law :-

"Whether learned First Appellate Court committed perversity even after affirming the judgment and decree passed by the trial court, by modifying the finding of learned trial court on the basis of the oral submission of learned counsel for the plaintiffs, who were respondents before learned First Appellate Court, but which submission is disowned by the plaintiff in this appeal, that the lands which have been developed by the plaintiffs, will fall in his share and by observing that the plot no. 59 area of 4.25 acres, 485, 486, 487 and 490, total area of 1.86 acres will fall in the share of appellant/ plaintiff in the Taktabandi by Survey Pleader Commissioner, by the ignoring the fact that the plaintiffs were the respondents before the learned First Appellate Court and the defendant was the appellant, thereby, rendering the impugned judgment passed by the learned First Appellate Court to be vague one ?"

Issue notice to the respondent.

The appellant is directed to file requisites of notice through both processes i.e. under registered