Shanti Singh VS Jugeshwar Nath Srivastava

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

ARUN KUMAR JHA
Shanti Singh – Appellant
Versus
Jugeshwar Nath Srivastava – Respondent

Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioners:Mr.Shashi Nath Jha and Mr. Sunny Kumar, Advocates
For the Respondents:Mr. Amit Shrivastava, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Girish Pandey, Advocate

JUDGMENT (CAV)

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondent no.1 on the point of admission and I intend to dispose of this petition at this stage itself.

2. The intervenors/petitioners have filed the instant petition seeking the following reliefs:—

“(i) Quashing/setting aside the part of the impugned order dated 17.01.2023 (Annx-4) passed by the learned Additional District Judge VI, Danapur, Patna, in Title Appeal No.-79 of 2019 (Divya Kumari & others Vs. Jugeshwar Nath Srivastava), whereby and whereunder the intervention applications of the present petitioners no. 1 to 4 dt. 06.12.2022 (Annx-2), as well as the intervention application of the present petitioners no. 5 to 6 dt.06.01.2023 (Annx-3), both filed U/O 1 Rule 10 (2) C.P.C. for their own impleadment in the pending Title Appeal as Co-appellants have been rejected.

(ii) Allowing the intervenors-petitioners’ application dt. 06.12.2022 (Annx-2) and also dt. 06.01.2023 (Annx-3), both filed U/O 1 Rule 10 (2) C.P.C. and implead them in the pending Title Appeal as Co-appellants, as these intervenors have admittedly purchased the suit land during pendency of the Title suit from the Plaintiffs.