PRADEEP KUMAR CHAURASIA Vs. SAROJ KUMAR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties.

(2.) Petitioner herein is Plaintiff No. 2 amongst five plaintiffs who instituted Title Suit No. 265/2008 for a declaration that the lands described in Item No. (i) and (ii) to the Schedule of plaint are part and parcel of public path / road / passage / Gali of the locality Panchmandir Gali for use and enjoyment of public at large of the locality. They sought temporary injunction upon the defendants, restraining them from obstructing in any manner the road and also for finally granting permanent injunction on adjudication. They also sought mandatory injunction upon the defendants to demolish and remove construction and structures over the road and it be made free from obstruction. Consequential decree with cost was prayed for accordingly.

(3.) The suit proceeded thereafter on appearance of the parties. Certain defendants Kedar Nath Burnwal and others approached this Court in WPC No. 7965/2011 seeking quashing of order dated 30.08.2011 passed by the Learned Sub Judge-V, Giridih in Title Suit No. 265/2008, whereby their application for recall of the order of injunction in view of the report of Pleader Commissioner, appointed as per the direction of this Court in WPC No. 3779/2010, have been rejected. The Learned Single Judge took note of the submission of the learned counsel for the then petitioners that the Trial Court may itself be directed to dispose of the suit expeditiously as the matter is at the evidence stage. Writ petition was disposed of by order dated 31.01.2013 directing the Learned Trial Court to make endeavour for expeditious disposal of the suit, preferably within a period of five months from the date of the order. Parties were directed to cooperate in the proceedings before the Court below and not take unnecessary adjournment in the matter. The matter progressed thereafter. However, in between, the Government Pleader made a prayer for impleadment of the Deputy Commissioner, Giridih through a petition dated 18.07.2013. That prayer was declined by order dated 06.08.2013 by the Learned Trial Court, which has remained unchallenged. The present petitioners thereafter made a prayer for impleadment of certain persons as defendant nos. 5 to 9 under Order 1, Rule 10 (2) of Civil Procedure Code on 11.12.2013. On being unsuccessful in seeking impleadment of new parties in the suit, petitioner approached this Court in WPC No. 296/2014. They however did not press their challenge to the rejection of the application made on behalf of Government Pleader for impleadment of Deputy Commissioner, Giridih contained in order dated 06.08.2013 passed by the Learned Trial Court. Learned Single Judge by order dated 18.07.2014 passed in WPC No. 2962014, allowed their prayer, so far as impleadment of new private parties were concerned, but the challenge to the order dated 06.08.2013 was not pressed. Only one plaintiff i.e. present petitioner had preferred WPC No. 296/2014 and thereafter Civil Review No. 72/2015 seeking to press the challenge to the order dated 06.08.2013 passed in Title Suit No. 265/2008 for impleadment of Deputy Commissioner, Giridih. The Learned Single Judge by order dated 03.09.2015 (Annexure-5 to the supplementary affidavit dated 06.03.2017), did not find any grounds to review the order dated 18.07.2014 passed in WPC No. 296/2014. However, the review application was disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh writ application. The order dated 06.08.2013 however remained unchallenged thereafter. It has neither been challenged in the present writ application.