Muslim Ansari vs Safiran Khatoon
2023 Latest Caselaw 2185 Jhar

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                         Civil Review No. 107 of 2019

    1. Muslim Ansari
    2. Taslim Ansari
    3. Asghar Ansari                  ....    ...Petitioners
                                  Versus
    1. Safiran Khatoon
    2. Jabir Ansari
    3. Sabir Ansari
    4. Sakil Ansari
    5. Masuran Khatoon
    6. Saira Khatoon
    7. Laila Khatoon
    8. Rajaque Mian
    9. Sahidan Khatoon
    10. Kalim Ansari
    11. Ajim Ansari
    12. Mumtaz Ansari
    13. Kadir Ansari
    14. Amna Khatoon
    15. Jainab Khatoon
    16. Kabiran Khatoon
    17. Baniya Khatoon
    18. Latif MIan
    19. Islam Mian
    20. Imtiaz Mian
    21. Ibrahim Mian
    22. Aki Mian                       ..... ...Respondents

        CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
                              ------

For the Petitioners : Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate

07/ Dated:-16.06.2023

1. Objection has been raised by the office that respondent no. 1

to 7 have not been made party in connected case.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that respondent

nos. 1 and 3 have not been made party because they have died. He

further submits that for substitution of respondent nos. 1 and 3 in the

second appeal I.A. was filed which was allowed and legal heirs and

successors of respondent nos. 1 to 3 have been made party in the civil

review. He submits that for that he has also filed supplementary affidavit

as well as interlocutory application for ignoring the defects.

3. In view of above submissions of the learned counsel for

the petitioners, surviving defects are ignored. I.A. No.2291 of 2021 stands

allowed and disposed of.

4. This petition has been filed for review of judgment/order

dated 27.09.2019 passed by this Court whereby Second Appeal No. 111

of 2016 preferred by the appellants/petitioners has been dismissed at the

admissions stage.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the order

was passed by the Revenue Authority is not binding upon the Civil Court

and that was relied by the trial court and appellate court. On that ground

he submits that the said judgment may be reviewed.

6. In view of above submissions of the learned counsel for the

petitioners, the Court has gone through the judgment wherein the Court

has taken note of the fact that the Court is conscious of the facts that in

civil cases the documents are being fabricated, thus the court has to be

very careful in relying on the documents but the D.C.LR. has found that

name of Gani Mahammand has been entered illegally in collusion of the

staff of the Circle Office and for that direction to initiate a proceeding

against the staff was issued. The Court further found that interpreting

the documents and discussing the evidences there is no perversity by the

learned courts and after discussing every aspects of the matter minutely

both the courts came to the concurrent finding in this regard. Thereafter

on the scope of section 100 of CPC the second appeal was dismissed.

Even second appeal was not admitted on the question of law and was

dismissed at the admission stage.

7. There is no apparent error on record. There are parameters

of reviewing the judgment which is not being fulfilled in this review

petition. No relief can be extended to the petitioners. Accordingly, this

petition is dismissed. Pending I.A, if any, stands disposed of.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Satyarthi/-