SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(All) 2505

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
CHANDRA KUMAR RAI
Ashish Rai – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: A.P.Singh
For the Respondent: C.S.C, Amit Kumar Asthana, Rameshwar Prasad Shukla

JUDGMENT :

Chandra Kumar Rai, J.

1. Heard Mr. A.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Amit Kumar Asthana, learned counsel for the contesting respondent no.5, Sri R.C. Srivastava, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the state-respondents and Sri Rameshwar Prasad Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent-gaon sabha.

2. Brief facts of the case are that predecessor of contesting respondents filed a suit for partition under Section 176 of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act in respect to plots of khata no.204, 205, 206, situated in village- Sohauli, impleading petitioner along with others as defendant. Contesting respondents filed a transfer application before the Collector to transfer the aforementioned partition suit. During pendency of transfer application, defendant no.1- Harihar expired on 26.9.2010, accordingly, petitioner filed an application under Order XXII Rule 10A of CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE before the Collector stating about the death of deceased and plaintiff also filed a substitution application. The Collector passed an order on 28.2.2011, allowing the substitution application although transfer application has been rejected. In partition suit before the S.D.O., an application dated 1.6.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top