PATNA HIGH COURT
MR. ARUN KUMAR JHA, J
Meena Devi – Appellant
Versus
Kailash Devi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of the land purchase and litigation. (Para 1 , 2 , 4) |
| 2. purchase and right to seek impleadment. (Para 5 , 8) |
| 3. legal principles regarding impleadment in ongoing cases. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. opposition to the petitioner's claims. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. legal validity of petitioner's standing. (Para 22 , 23) |
| 6. court's analysis of the evidentiary and legal aspects. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 7. conclusions on the petitioner's rights. (Para 32 , 33) |
| 8. final decision and dismissal of the case. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37) |
JUDGMENT
Date : 06-05-2025
The present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 12.12.2022 passed in Misc. Case No. 227/1996 by learned Additional District Judge-XIV, Patna whereby and whereunder the petition of the intervener/petitioner dated 30.07.2010 filed under Order 1 Rule 10 (2) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) has been rejected along with another petition filed by some other persons under Section 151 of the Code.
2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the petitioner is that she had purchased the land bearing Khata No. 1
Dhanlakshmi and Ors. vs. P. Mohan and Ors.
Dhurandhar Prasad Singh vs. Jai Prakash University and others
Savitri Devi vs. District Judge, Gorakhpur and others
Sharadamma vs. Mohammed Pyrejan (dead) through Legal Representatives and another
Mumbai International Airport (P) Ltd. v. Regency Convention Centre & Hotels (P) Ltd.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.