Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 22]

Patna High Court - Orders

Patna Branch A.G Office Housing ... vs Mahesh Kumar Yadav @ Mahesh Yadav on 28 March, 2016

Author: Mungeshwar Sahoo

Bench: Mungeshwar Sahoo

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6129 of 2015
                 ======================================================
                 1. Patna Branch A.G. Office Housing Co-operative Society Ltd., Patna
                 through it's Honorary Secretary having it's registered office at A.G. Colony,
                 Sheikhpura, P.S. Shastri Nagar, District- Patna.

                                                                         .... ....   Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
                 1. Mahesh Kumar Yadav @ Mahesh Yadav, son of not known to the
                 petitioner, resident of C/o Bengali Sharma, Mangatam timber, A.G. Colony,
                 Main Road, Sheikhpura, P.S. Shastri Nagar,District- Patna.

                                                        .... .... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar
                 For the Respondent/s : Mr.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR
                 SAHOO
                 ORAL ORDER

2   28-03-2016

By order dated 20.02.2015, learned Munsif-II, Patna in Title Suit No.25 of 2000, rejected the application filed by the plaintiff- petitioner for deciding the issue of maintainability of the Suit as preliminary Suit under Order XIV, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Both the parties have concluded their evidence and the arguments have been heard in part and issue regarding maintainability of the Suit has already been framed.

In view of the above position that the arguments have been heard in part, at this stage, it is not necessary to decide the question of maintainability of the Suit as preliminary issue. The mandate of Order 14, Rule 2 is that the court is to pronounce Patna High Court CWJC No.6129 of 2015 (2) dt.28-03-2016 2/2 judgment on all issues. There is only exception to this mandate provided under order XIV, Rule 2 CPC.

In view of the above, I find no reason to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction.

Thus the application is dismissed.

(Mungeshwar Sahoo, J) singh/-

U