Rajendra Kumar Sharma vs Surendra Nath Sharma & Ors on 30 July, 2008

[Cites 0, Cited by 2]

Jharkhand High Court

Rajendra Kumar Sharma vs Surendra Nath Sharma & Ors on 30 July, 2008

Bench: Chief Justice

                                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF
        JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                       L.P. A No.        82        OF 2008
        Rajendra Kumar Sharma                                                   Appellant


                                                     Versus
        1.Surendra Nath Sharma
        2.Narendra Kumar Sharma
        3.Sri Lal Sharma
        4.Devendra Nath Sharma                                                  Respondents
                                                   -------
        CORAM                                        HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                                                   HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.K. SINHA


        For the Appellant/Petitioner                          M/s.B.K.Prasad, Bakshi Vibha
        For the Respondent/Opp.Party                                ------
                                                       --------
3. 30.7.2008

This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 5.2.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P (C) No. 2166/2007, by which the writ petition was allowed, directing the defendant-petitioner-respondent to implead the daughters also to the Title Partition Suit No.32/2000, which is pending trial in the court of Sub-Judge VII, Deoghar.

2. The plaintiff-appellant, who was respondent before the learned Single Judge, has preferred this appeal and in support of the same, it was submitted that the Partition Suit has been filed not for division of the coparcenary property inherited by the Karta of the family but for the property which had been raised by the father and sons of the family and the learned Single Judge has committed an error in recording that the Partition Suit, which is pending, relates to the partition of joint family ancestral property.

3. In so far as the nature of the property, which is involved in the Partition Suit, is concerned, the appellate court at this stage cannot form an opinion as to whether the suit property is a coparcenary property or is the property raised by the father and sons of the family or that the sisters are not required to be included. In any case, the nature of the suit property, which is the subject- matter of the trial, obviously will be considered by the trial court on the basis of the evidence adduced by the parties and if the suit is a partition suit, all the members constituting the joint family will have to be impleaded as defendants. For this reason alone, we find no infirmity in the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

4. In so far as the interest of daughters of the family is concerned, if they are impleaded and yet they do not choose to appear, the plaintiff will be absolved of the responsibility of not proceeding in a legal manner. But at this stage, if the learned Single Judge has been pleased to hold that the daughters also should be included in the partition suit for the detailed reasons stated in the impugned order on the point of law as also on merit, we find no good or legal ground to interfere with the same, as the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge does not even cause any prejudice to the interest of the plaintiff- appellant.

The appeal, under the circumstance, is dismissed at the stage of admission itself.

(Gyan Sudha Misra.C.J.) (D.K.Sinha.,J.) dey

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Jharkhand High Court