Jharkhand High Court
Priscilla Ahmed & Ors vs Lilawati & Ors on 29 October, 2024
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
S.A. No. 387 of 2003
------
Priscilla Ahmed & Ors. .... .... .... Appellants
Versus
Lilawati & Ors. .... .... .... Respondents
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Appellants : Mr. Atanu Banerjee, Advocate
For the Intervener : Mr. S. Hamidul Haque, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Singh, Advocate
------
Order No.36 Dated- 29.10.2024
I.A. No.7473 of 2022
The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this
interlocutory application has been filed with a prayer to implead the
interveners as proforma respondents in the instant appeal. It is then
submitted that supplementary affidavit dated 09.05.2024 has been filed
mentioning the errors in the I.A. No. 7473 of 2022. It is then submitted
that another supplementary affidavit dated 06.12.2022 was filed
intimating therein that the original defendant -Nisar Ahmad died on
13.12.2004 and after death of Nisar Ahmad, his son Anwar Ansari is
the present recipient of the rent from the tenanted premises.
Intervener Nos. 1 to 6 are the occupants of different shops over the suit
premises. It is then submitted that Second Appeal No. 387 of 2003 has
been filed by the defendant of Title Suit No. 184 of 1969 of the court of
Sub Judge -VI, Dhanbad. The suit was decreed and the defendants of
the suit were directed to give possession of the disputed properties to
the plaintiff. Title Appeal No. 12 of 1997 filed by the defendant-
appellant has been dismissed by the impugned judgment dated
24.05.2003 passed in Title Appeal No. 12 of 1997 by the Additional
District Judge -VIII, Dhanbad. The interveners are the tenants of
different shops situated over the suit land. The learned counsel for the
appellants submits that each of the interveners are ready and willing
to abide by the judgment to be passed in this second appeal and they
will not take any plea inconsistent with the plea of the appellants of
the second appeal during the hearing of this appeal. Hence, they be
impleaded as proforma respondent nos. 5 to 10.
The learned counsel for the respondents has no serious
objection.
Considering the aforesaid facts, the prayer to allow the
interveners to be impleaded as proforma respondent nos. 5 to 10 of
this second appeal is allowed subject to the condition that each of the
interveners files their personal affidavit to the effect that they are
ready and willing to abide by the judgment to be passed in this second
appeal and they will not agitate any plea inconsistent with the plea of
the appellants of this second appeal.
The said affidavits be filed by each of the interveners within four
weeks, failing which this interlocutory application shall stand
dismissed without further reference to the Bench. In case, the
interveners file the said affidavits; this registry is directed to
incorporate the name, parentage and address of the intervener nos. 1
to 6 in the cause title of this appeal memo, as respondent nos. 5 to 10.
This interlocutory application is disposed of accordingly.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Heard the parties.
Learned counsel for the appellants does not press this
interlocutory application.
Accordingly, this interlocutory application is rejected as not
pressed.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Heard the parties.
Learned counsel for the appellants does not press this
interlocutory application.
Accordingly, this interlocutory application is rejected as not
pressed.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Heard the parties.
Learned counsel for the appellants does not press this
interlocutory application.
Accordingly, this interlocutory application is rejected as not
pressed.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
The learned counsel for the appellants submits that this
interlocutory application has been filed with a prayer to allow the
appellants to adduce additional evidence.
It is a settled principle of law that the petition filed under Order
XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure is to be heard at the time of
hearing of the appeal.
Accordingly, this interlocutory application will be considered at
the time of hearing of this appeal.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
The learned counsel for the appellants submits that this
interlocutory application has been filed with a prayer to allow the
appellants to adduce additional evidence.
It is a settled principle of law that the petition filed under Order
XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure is to be heard at the time of
hearing of the appeal.
Accordingly, this interlocutory application will be considered at
the time of hearing of this appeal.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
List this appeal after four weeks.
Sonu-Gunjan/- (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
