Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Punit Gope, s/o Late Churaman Gope – Appellant
Versus
Most Chundari @ Most. Goura, d/o late Hupali Gope & w/o late Kamal Gope – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. jurisdiction under article 227 for review of order. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. necessity of parties in partition suit. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's analysis on pending pleader commissioner report. (Para 6) |
| 4. disposal of petition with future liberty for contention. (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT :
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Heard Mr. Pratyush Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the O.P. Nos. 1 to 5, who are the contesting opposite parties.
2. This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, wherein prayer has been made for setting aside the order dated 14.06.2024, passed in Partition Suit No. 11 of 1989 by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Div.)-I, Hazaribag, whereby, the learned court has been pleased to allow the petition which has been filed for objecting the preparation of the final decree on the ground that the purchasers of the part of the land of the suit property were not made the parties in the suit.
3. Mr. Pratyush Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/defendants submits that the suit property was sold to certain persons, but those persons have not been made party, in view
The necessity of including all necessary parties in a partition suit is essential, and issues can be addressed appropriately following a Pleader Commissioner Report.
A party not seeking relief cannot be compelled to add a stranger to the suit, affirming the plaintiff's discretion in litigation under the Code of Civil Procedure.
Judicial and quasi-judicial authorities must provide reasons for their decisions to ensure transparency, accountability, and adherence to principles of natural justice.
The court affirmed that final decree proceedings under the Partition Act must adhere to clear judicial directives and allowed parties the right to participate in property auction sales as mandated by....
A necessary party is one without whom no effective decree can be passed; a plaintiff has the discretion to choose parties in a suit.
The court upheld the validity of prior property rights and found no illegality in the lower court's order concerning the exclusion of the petitioner's share in the final decree proceedings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the court has the power to allow amendments to the plaint to prevent the inexecutability of a partition decree.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
