Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
CHANDRA KUMAR RAI
Shiv Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Chandra Kumar Rai, J.
1. Heard Mr. R.C. Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. S.K. Chaubey, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Vinod Kumar Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ram Singh, learned counsel for respondent No.5, Mr. Sant Ram Sharma, learned counsel for the Nagar Panchayat and Mr. Raj Kumar Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
2. Brief facts of the case are that petitioner and respondent no.5 are real brothers. A suit for partition under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 was filed by respondent no.5/Kashi Prasad, impleading the petitioner as defendant in respect to plot no.408/1, area 0.903 hect., situated at Village Baruwa Syodha, Naraini, Pergana & Tahsil- Naraini, District Banda, claiming ½ share. Petitioner appeared in the aforementioned suit and filed his written statement. During pendency of the aforementioned suit, petitioner has filed an application dated 6.10.2022 under Order 14 Rule 5 of the CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE , for framing additional issues in the suit. On behalf of respondent no.5, objection was filed to the petitioner’s application dated 6.10.2022. The Trial Court/Sub Divisional Officer rejecte
In partition suits, additional issues may be rejected if existing issues sufficiently address the involvement of the parties and the matter at hand.
Court emphasized the necessity of maintaining interim orders during appeal proceedings and directing merits-based adjudication.
The court emphasized the necessity of a fair hearing in legal proceedings, ruling that ex-parte orders and technical rejections of applications cannot deny substantive justice.
Transfer applications must be based on genuine grounds; repeated applications causing undue delay in proceedings are unjustified.
The court clarified that the Board of Revenue has jurisdiction to entertain a case through either revision or second appeal under the relevant acts, ensuring no prejudice to the petitioner.
The court upheld the trial court's decision to partly dismiss the application for additional issues, finding it necessary for the adjudication of the partition suit.
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
