RAVI KANT VERMA Vs. HULAS MAHATO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed by the applicants under Order XLI Rule 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') read with Sec. 151 of the Code seeking recall of a judgment rendered by a Bench of this Court on 12/8/2013 in First Appeal No.420 of 1978.

(2.) The applicants herein claim to be the legal heirs and successors of late Smt. Kaushalya Kumari, who was respondent no.1 in the First Appeal in question. Smt. Kaushalya Kumari is said to have filed Title Suit No.146 of 1976 seeking her right to the property in question acquired vide registered sale deeds executed on 14/11/1955. The facts of the case with regard to acquisition of right to title of the property need not be, for the present, discussed in detail. However, it is suffice to indicate for deciding this application that the Title Suit of Smt. Kaushalya Kumari was decreed by the Additional Subordinate Judge-II, Biharsharif, vide judgment and decree dtd. 5/5/1978, and the respondents herein, who are legal heirs and representatives of the original defendants, namely Bodh Ram Mahto and others, filed the First Appeal challenging the judgment and decree of the trial Court. Apart from Smt. Kaushalya Kumari, one Maro Devi, daughter of Paro Kuer, was also a respondent in the First Appeal and it may be suffice to indicate that Paro Kuer was the original owner of the property from whom, based on sale deeds and succession, the parties herein claimed the right to the property.

(3.) Be that as it may be, after filing of the First Appeal in which plaintiff Smt. Kaushalya Kumari was respondent no.1, it is the case of the applicants that the First Appeal was admitted, Smt. Kaushalya Kumari also filed a cross objection in the First Appeal which was admitted on 9/5/1985 and on 21/4/1993, the counsel representingSmt. Kaushalya Kumari, one Sri Chitra Gupt Prasad informed the Court that Smt. Kaushalya Kumari has died. Thereafter, on 15/1/1999, it seems that the counsel representing Smt. Kaushalya Kumari pleaded no instructions in the matter. Accordingly, the Court directed for issuing notice to the legal heirs of respondent no.1 Smt. Kaushalya Kumari, whose names and details were given in a substitution petition filed by the appellants.