Anil Kumar Pathak VS Umesh Bhagat

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

ARUN KUMAR JHA
Anil Kumar Pathak – Appellant
Versus
Umesh Bhagat – Respondent

Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioners:Mr. Ganpati Trivedi, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mishra and Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocates
For the Respondent Nos.1 and 2:Mr. Prabhat Ranjan Singh, Advocate

JUDGMENT (CAV)

The present petition has been filed for setting aside the order dated 28.04.2017 passed by learned Munsif, Jamui in Title Suit No. 95 of 2016, whereby and whereunder the petition filed under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short ‘the Code’) by the intervenors has been allowed.

2. Briefly stated, the facts leading to the institution of the present civil miscellaneous petition are that the petitioners are plaintiffs in Title Suit No. 95 of 2016. The plaintiffs claimed Khesra Nos. 219 and 220 of Khata No. 36 are the land of the plaintiffs. 2 decimal of land of Khesra No. 220 came in possession of the predecessor of the plaintiffs through sale certificate issued in auction proceeding in Execution Case No. 35 of 1939 in the name of Rameshwar Pathak, who was grandfather of plaintiff/petitioner no. 1 and great grandfather of plaintiffs/petitioner nos. 2 and 3. After the death of Rameshwar Pathak, property belonging to him was partitioned between his two sons, namely Jairam Pathak and Bishunath Pathak, in Partition Suit No. 37 of 1979 and accordingly, Khesra No. 220 (entire) along with other khesras came in possession of Jairam Pathak, the father of pet