Manoj Prasad Sah vs Uma Shankar Sah
2025 Latest Caselaw 1218 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Manoj Prasad Sah vs Uma Shankar Sah on 29 July, 2025

Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

                                                                     2025:JHHC:20902




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
                            C.M.P. No. 269 of 2025
                                           ----

Manoj Prasad Sah, aged about 56 years, son of Sri Baijnath Sah, resident of village - Masaliya, PO - Masaliya, PS - Dumka, District

- Dumka, Jharkhand .... Petitioner

-- Versus --

1. Uma Shankar Sah, son of Sri Baijnath Sah

2. Pramod Sah, son of Shri Baijnath Sah, both are resident of village -

Kuruwachak, Raghunathganj, PO and PS - Dumka, District - Dumka, Jharkhand

3. Rajendra Prasad Sah, son of Late Surya Narayan Sah, resident at in front of Mission Church, PO and PS - Dumka, District - Dumka, Jharkhand .... Opposite Parties

----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

---

For the Petitioner :- Mr. Amar Kr. Sinha, Advocate :- Mr. Sandeep Verma, Advocate For O.P. Nos.1 and 2 :- Mr. Sudhir Kr. Sharma, Advocate :- Mr. Indu Shekhar Gupta, Advocate :- Mr. Harshit Pradhan, Advocate

----

05/29.07.2025 Mr. Amar Kr. Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner submits that the petitioner has already preferred a

petition under Order XXI Rule 97 of CPC before the learned

Executing Court which has been admitted by the learned Court and

it is still pending and no final decision has been taken in that

miscellaneous case and in the meantime the petitioner has filed a

petition under Order I Rule 10 of CPC which has been decided by

the impugned order.

2. Mr. Sudhir Kr. Sharma, learned counsel appearing for

2025:JHHC:20902

opposite party Nos.1 and 2 submits that the petitioner can take all

grounds before the learned Court in the miscellaneous case which is

still pending.

3. In view of the above, Mr. Amar Kr. Sinha, learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this

petition with liberty to take all the grounds in the pending

miscellaneous case before the learned Executing Court.

4. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the

aforesaid liberty.

5. Liberty is provided to the petitioner to pray before the

learned Executing Court to first decide the Order XXI Rule 97 of CPC

petition thereafter proceed further and that will be decided

expeditiously without providing any unnecessary adjournment as

the learned Executing Court is required to execute the decree

expeditiously in light of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in

the case of Rahul S. Shah versus Jinendra Kumar Gandhi &

Ors. reported in (2021) 6 SCC 418.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Sangam/