Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 198 (JHR)

Vijay Kumar Singh v. State of Jharkhand

2023-02-20

ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

body2023
JUDGMENT : [Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.] I.A. No. 1835 of 2022 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that this petition has been filed for deleting the name of petitioner No. 1 and petitioner No. 4 (ii) who have expired during the pendency of the present case. She submits that their names be simply deleted from the cause title. 2. The learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to the prayer made through interlocutory application. 3. Considering the aforesaid submissions, I.A. No. 1835 of 2022 is hereby allowed at the risk of the petitioners. Counsel for the petitioners is directed to delete the names of petitioner No. 1 and petitioner No. 4(ii) from the cause title during the course of the day. I.A. No. 1837 of 2022 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner No. 3 has expired during the pendency of this case on 05.05.2021. The death certificate is on record. She submits that the interlocutory application has been filed through the only son of petitioner No. 3 along with the Vakalatnama. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to the prayer for substitution. 6. Accordingly, I.A. No. 1837 of 2022 is hereby allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to delete the name of the petitioner No. 3 and insert the names of legal heir and successor of the petitioner No. 3 whose details has been mentioned at paragraph No. 2 of the Interlocutory application in red ink during the course of the day. I.A. No. 1838 of 2022 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that I.A. No. 1838 of 2022 has been filed for deleting the name of petitioner No. 5 who died on 30.01.2019. The death certificate is on record. The petition for substitution has been filed by his only son namely Rupesh Kumar Singh whose details has been mentioned at para 2 of the interlocutory application. 8. Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to the prayer for substitution. Accordingly, I.A. No. 1838 of 2022 is hereby allowed. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to delete the name of petitioner No. 5 and insert the name of his legal heir and successor whose details has been given at paragraph 2 of the interlocutory application. Necessary correction be done in red ink during the course of the day. Accordingly, I.A. No. 1838 of 2022 is hereby allowed. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to delete the name of petitioner No. 5 and insert the name of his legal heir and successor whose details has been given at paragraph 2 of the interlocutory application. Necessary correction be done in red ink during the course of the day. I.A. No. 2135 of 2020 10. I.A. No. 2135 of 2020 has been filed by one Krishna Ram for impleading him as a private respondent. It is submitted by learned counsel for the intervener that Krishna Ram has expired. 11. Considering the aforesaid submission, I.A. No. 2135 of 2020 is closed. I.A. No. 2376 of 2020 12. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that the counter affidavit on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 4 has already been filed. Therefore this interlocutory application may be closed. 13. I.A. No. 2376 of 2020 is closed. I.A. No. 1060 of 2022 14. Nobody appears on behalf of the intervener to press this interlocutory application. 15. Accordingly, I.A. No. 1060 of 2022 is dismissed as not pressed. W.P. (C) No. 2677 of 2008 16. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that entire query of this court has been explained by filing a supplementary counter affidavit in the present case. She submits that the allegation that two parallel jamabandi are running with respect to the same property is not correct as per the explanation furnished in the supplementary affidavit. 17. Post this case on 28.02.2023 under appropriate heading in the supplementary cause list.