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 0, Cited by 1]

Patna High Court - Orders

Jagdish Tiwary & Ors vs Lalita Kuer & Ors on 21 October, 2011

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

                               Civil Review No.1 of 2011

                    1. Jagdish Tiwary
                    2. Madan Tiwary
                    3. Ramadhar Tiwary
                    4. Rajesh Kumar Tiwary
                       All sons of Late Ram Daras Tiwary
                    5. Saraswati Devi
                    6. Ramawati Devi
                    7. Deovanti Devi
                    8. Nirmala Devi
                       All daughters of Late Ram Daras Tiwary
                      All residents of village Bariswan, P.S. Shahpur, District-Bhojpur.
                                        ....Defendant-Appellant-Appellants-petitioners.
                                -Versus-
                    1. Lalita Kuer, widow of Ishwar Dayal Tiwary deceased.
                    2. Prem Prakash Tiwary
                    3. Sri Prakash Tiwary
                      All sons of Late Ishwar Dayal Tiwary
                    4. Pushpa Devi
                    5. Kiran Devi
                    6. Usha Devi
                    7. Aruni Devi @ Buchan Devi
                     All Daughters of Late Ishwar Dayal Tiwary
                     All residents of Village Bariswan, P.S. Shahpur, District-Bhojpur.
                                            .... Plaintiff-respondent-respondents-respondents..
                                        ----------

                    For the petitioner            : Mr. K. N. Choubey, Senior Advocate with
                                                    Mr. Ujjwal Kumar Sinha, Advocate.

                    For the respondents           : None.
                                                        --------

05/   21.10.2011

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This petition has been filed by the petitioners for review of order dated 03.12.2010 by which this Court dismissed S.A.No.255 of 1991 filed by the petitioners challenging concurrent judgments and decree of both the courts below.

3. From the averments made by learned counsel for the -2- petitioners and the materials on record it is quite apparent that there is no error apparent on the face of record, nor there is any fresh material to take a different view.

4. Accordingly, this civil review petition is dismissed.

(S. N. Hussain, J.) Sunil