IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI ----

Misc. Appeal No. 216 of 2024 ----

1.Smt. Jaspreet Kaur, wife of late Sarbajeet Singh, aged about 49 years

2.Parvinder Singh, aged about 23 years, son of late Sarbajeet Singh, both residents of Punjabi Mohalla, P.S. Giridih(T), PO and District -Giridih …… …. ….. Appellant(s)/O.P.No.1 and 2 -- Versus --

1.Smt Ratanjot Kaur, d/o late Sadilal Bagga, w/o Sri Harbindar Singh, r/o AD-1/357, LDA Colony, Kanpur Road, PO -LDA Colony, P.S. -LDA Colony, Lucknow (U.P.), Aadhar No.4415 1531 5050 through Registered Power of Attorney Holder Vikram Kumar Singh, S/o Shri Shankar Kumar Singh, R/o Indira Colony, Makatpur, Giridih, P.O. Makatpur, PS and District Giridih, State Jharkhand, being Deed No.98 dated 14.02.2020, Aadhar No. 7432

7716 5794 …… …. ……… Respondent(s)/petitioner

2.State of Jharkhand, through Deputy Commissioner, PO and PS -Giridih, Giridih …..…. …… Proforma Respondent/Proforma O.P.

----

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ---

For the Appellant(s) :- Mr. Manjul Prasad, Senior Advocate Mr. Baban Prasad, Advocate Mr. Akhouri Prakhar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Arbind Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Aniket Rohan, Advocate For the Respondent/State :- Mr. Ashutosh Anand, Advocate For the Respondent No.1. :- Mr. Amitesh Kumar Geasan, Advocate ----

08/09.04.2025 Heard Mr. Manjul Prasad, the learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. Baban Prasad the learned vice counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants as well as Mr. Ashutosh Anand, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent State and Mr. Amitesh Kumar Geasan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.1.

2. I.A. No.5508 of 2024 has been filed for condonation of delay of 184 days occurred in preferring the instant appeal.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that on the wrong notion initially the impugned order was challenged in C.M.P being C.M.P.No.1196 of 2023. He submits that in the same C.M.P, it was found that the C.M.P was not maintainable and only the appeal can be maintained which was withdrawn by order dated 17.05.2024 with liberty to file the appeal and thereafter the present appeal has been filed. He submits in view of that, the delay has occurred.

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.1 opposed the prayer and submits that proper explanation is not there.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Deputy Commissioner, Giridih/ respondent no.2 submits that it is upon the Court to take into consideration about the filing of the case in wrong forum.

6. It is an admitted position that the said order was challenged in C.M.P. being C.M.P.No.1196 of 2023 which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file the appeal and pursuant to that, the instant appeal has been filed. It is well settled that if the wrong forum has inadvertently been chosen, that period can be condoned and such delay has occurred in the case in hand and the Court finds that sufficient ground has been made out to condone the delay and as such, the delay of 184 days in preferring the instant appeal is, hereby, condoned.

7. The instant I.A filed for condonation of delay stands allowed and disposed of.

8. The learned counsel for the appellants and the respondents have addressed the Court in the main appeal.

9. The instant appeal has been filed under Order IXL Rule 1(f) of the CPC for setting aside the order dated 5.9.2023 passed in Revocation Case No.4 of 2020 under section 263 of Indian Succession Act for revocation of Probate Certificate Dated 22.05.2013 whereby the learned court has been pleased to struck off the defense of the appellants.

10. Mr. Manjul Prasad, the learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that the respondent no.1, Smt. Ratanjot Kaur, daughter of late Sadilal Bagga has filed an application under section 263 of the Indian Succession Act for setting aside the Probate Certificate Dated 22.05.2013 granted in Probate Case No.12 of 2011 and the order dated 05.