LAWS(JHAR)-2019-4-6

ULFAT MIAN AGE ABOUT 69 YEARS SON OF LATE BULAKI MIAN Vs. KUDARIA KHATOON FIRST WIDOW OF LATE PUDIN MIAN @ HASMUDDIN

Decided On April 02, 2019
Ulfat Mian Age About 69 Years Son Of Late Bulaki Mian Appellant
V/S
Kudaria Khatoon First Widow Of Late Pudin Mian @ Hasmuddin Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is under Article 227 of the Constitution of India whereby and whereunder the order dated 07.07.2018 in Civil Appeal No.27 of 2009 by District Judge-I, Giridih has been assailed whereby and whereunder the suit has been said to be abated against one Khalijan Khatoon who has died on 05.07.2015 and thereafter a petition filed by the appellant No.1(b) and 1(c) namely, Majlum Ansari and Lukman Ansari respectively but the affidavit was shown by one Ulfat Mian who is the appellant No.2 in the appeal praying therein for expunging the name of Khalijan Khatoon since she has died on 05.07.2015 which has been rejected by the impugned order against which the present writ petition has been filed.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the trial Court has committed gross error in passing the impugned order, it is for the reason that when the appellant No.1(a) has died in course of pendency of the appeal, her name ought to have been expunged and for that an application has been made without appreciating the provision as contained under Order XXII Rule 1.

(3.) After having heard and going across the pleadings made in the writ petition as also the reason recorded in the impugned order, it is evident therefrom that a suit for declaration of right and title over the property in question has been filed being Title Suit No.196 of 1996 against the defendants for adjudication that the plaintiff's raiyati kayami subsisting title over the land be declared and possession of plaintiffs over the land be confirmed, the title suit has been dismissed on an application filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure against which the appeal has been filed being Title Appeal No.27 of 2009 and in course of the pendency of the aforesaid appeal, the appellant No.1 has died.