M/S M.M. Bhadani @ Brothers Represented ... vs The State Of Jharkhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 2191 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

M/S M.M. Bhadani @ Brothers Represented ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 20 March, 2026

Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

                                         ( 2026:JHHC:7823 )




      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                 Civil Review No. 22 of 2026

        M/s M.M. Bhadani @ Brothers represented through one of the partner
      Krishna Mohan Bhadani, aged about 67 years, son of late Harihar Prasad
      Bhadani, resident of Bishrambag , Ward No.-9, New Ward No.-18, P.O.
      Jhumri, Telaiya, P.S. Telaiya, District-Koderma
                                                 ..........Petitioner

                        -Versus-

      1. The State of Jharkhand
      2. Anjana Bhadani, wife of late Navin Bhadani
      3. Snigdha Bhadani, daughter rof late Navin Bhadani
         Both resident of C.H. School Road, Near Purnima Talkies, P.O. Jhumri
         Telaiya, P.S. Telaiya, District-Koderma
      4. Apsara Shoe House through Prop. Kurshid Alam, son of not known to
         the petitioner, resident of Ward No. 07 (New Ward No. 15), P.O.
         Jhumri Telaiya, P.S. Telaiya, District-Koderma

                                                     ............Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, Advocate Ms. Micky Kumari, Advocate

For the State : Mr. Deepak Kumar, A.C. to S.C. (L &C)-III

02/Dated: 20/03/2026 I.A. No.3241 of 2026 has been filed for condonation of delay of 24

days in filing the present review petition.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in preparation of filing

the civil review petition delay of 24 days has occurred.

3. Learned counsel for the State has got no serious objection if the delay

of 24 days is condoned.

4. In view of above submission and for the reasons assigned in the I.A,

prayer made in I.A. is allowed. I.A. No.3241 of 2026 stands allowed and disposed

of and accordingly, delay of 24 days in filing the present review petition is

condoned.

5. This review petition has been filed for review of order dated ( 2026:JHHC:7823 )

15.04.2025 passed by this Court in C.M.P. No. 355 of 2025.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated

27.11.2024 passed in Eviction Suit No. 02/2010 in Civil Misc. No. 110 of 2024 was

under challenge in C.M.P. No. 355 of 2025 and the said C.M.P. was dismissed by

order dated 15.04.2025. He further submits that petition under Order 22 Rule 3

and 4 and under Order 1 Rule 10 and section 151 of C.P.C for impleadment has

been allowed by the learned court and this Court affirmed the said order which is

not in accordance with law and in view of that order dated 27.11.2024 may kindly

be reviewed.

7. Considering that the interveners are the daughter and grand daughter

of M.M. Bhadani and M.M. Bhadani and brothers have instituted the suit and in

view of that the learned trial court has allowed the petition which has been

affirmed by this Court considering the genealogical table and it was found that

their presence would facilitate the complete determination of the matter in dispute

and in view of that the said C.M.P. has been dismissed. There is no apparent error

on the record.

8. The Court finds that there is no illegality in the order and accordingly,

this civil review petition is dismissed. Pending I.A, if any, stands dismissed.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

Dt. 20.03.2026 Satyarthi/