Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1789 (JHR)

Shibo Oraon v. Fagu Oraon

2019-10-22

SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

body2019
JUDGMENT : SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J. I.A. No. 9813 of 2019 1. The instant interlocutory application has been filed for expunging the name of respondent no. 3 who has died issueless and whose relative is already on record i.e. respondent no. 4. 2. By way of referring to the paragraph 6 of the said I.A. Mr. Das, submits that the respondent no. 4 is the only legal heir/successor of the respondent no. 3 who is already on record. In that view of the matter, he submits that he may kindly be allowed to delete the name of respondent no. 3. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 1 has got no objection in allowing the said I.A. 4. In view of the above facts and submissions of the learned counsel for the appellants, the instant interlocutory application stands allowed. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant is directed to delete the name of legal heirs/successors of the respondent no. 3. 6. Accordingly, the I.A. No. 9813 of 2019 stands allowed and disposed of. I.A. No. 11232 of 2018 7. The instant interlocutory application has been filed for substitution of the appellant no. 4 namely Basudeo Oraon, who has died during the pendency of the appeal on 04.12.2018. 8. By way of referring to the paragraph 3 of the said I.A. Mr. Das, submits that the name of the legal heirs/successors of the appellant no. 4 is provided and further submits that the said I.A. is within time. He further submits that he may kindly be allowed to substitute the name of legal heirs/successors of the appellant no. 4. 9. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 1 has got no objection in allowing the said I.A. 10. In view of the above facts and submissions of the learned counsel for the appellants and looking into the paragraph 3 of the said I.A. wherein the name of the legal heirs/successors of the appellant no. 4 is provided, learned counsel for the appellant is directed to make out necessary correction in the cause title in course of the day. 11. Accordingly, the I.A. No. 11232 of 2018 stands allowed and disposed of. I.A. No. 2617 of 2018 and I.A. No. 8774 of 2018 12. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that at paragraph no. 1 of I.A. No. 8774 of 2018 there is typographical mistake as in place of appellant no. 11. Accordingly, the I.A. No. 11232 of 2018 stands allowed and disposed of. I.A. No. 2617 of 2018 and I.A. No. 8774 of 2018 12. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that at paragraph no. 1 of I.A. No. 8774 of 2018 there is typographical mistake as in place of appellant no. 6 and respondent no. 6, has been typed for which he submits that he may kindly be allowed to correct the same. 13. Learned counsel for the appellant is permitted to correct the same in course of the day. 14. The I.A. No. 2617 of 2018 has been filed for substitution of legal heirs/successors of appellant no. 6 and I.A. No. 8774 of 2018 has been filed for condoning the delay in filing I.A. No. 2617 of 2018 for substitution of legal heirs/successors of appellant no. 6 namely Birsa Oraon who died during the pendency of the Second Appeal and setting aside the abatement in respect of appellant no. 6 and for expunging the name of respondent no. 2 Bhola Oraon. 15. Mr. A.K. Das, learned counsel for the appellants by way of referring to paragraph 6 submits that Bhola Oraon, has died issueless and only surviving legal heir of Bhola Oraon, is Fagu Oraon, who is already on record, therefore, name of Bhola Oraon may kindly be allowed to be deleted from the cause title. 16. He further submits that the information of death of appellant no. 6 was not provided and the appellant came to know about the death of appellant no. 6 and as soon as the information was received with regard to the death of appellant no. 6, he has filed two I.As. 17. Delay in filing the 16 months is condoned after being satisfied for the reasons which has been provided in I.A. No. 8774 of 2018 subject to payment of cost of Rs.2000/-to the learned counsel for the respondent. 18. In view of the above facts and submissions and looking to the paragraph 6, Mr. Das, learned counsel for the appellants is allowed to delete the name of Bhola Oraon in course of the day. 19. In view of the above facts and circumstances, both the interlocutory applications are allowed and the abatement against the appellant no. 6 is set aside. 20. Das, learned counsel for the appellants is allowed to delete the name of Bhola Oraon in course of the day. 19. In view of the above facts and circumstances, both the interlocutory applications are allowed and the abatement against the appellant no. 6 is set aside. 20. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant is directed to make out necessary correction in the cause title in course of the day. 21. Both the interlocutory applications are allowed and disposed of. I.A. No. 2133 of 2014 and I.A. No. 9337 of 2017 22. Both the interlocutory applications shall be considered at time of admission of this Second Appeal. S.A. No. 23 of 2014 23. Let this matter appear under the heading “For Admission.”