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 2]

Patna High Court - Orders

Manju Devi vs Krishna Nandan Paswan on 15 March, 2016

Author: Mungeshwar Sahoo

Bench: Mungeshwar Sahoo

            Patna High Court CWJC No.4914 of 2015 (2) dt.15-03-2016




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                       Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4914 of 2015
                        ======================================================
                        1. Manju Devi W/o Rajesh Paswan, d/o Late Girdhari resident of Village-
                        Tetariya, P.S.- Chandradeep, District- Munger.

                                                                          .... .... Petitioner/s
                                                          Versus
                        1. Krishna Nandan Paswan Son of Late Subey Lal Paswan, resident of
                        village- Matter Khager Purani Bazar Lakhisarai, Mohalla- Shanter, P.S.
                        Lakhisarai, District- Lakhisarai.

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

2       15-03-2016

Perused the order dated 10.11.2014 passed by the A.D.J. Vth, Lakhisarai in Probate Case No. 15 of 2014, which is under challenge in this writ application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

2. It appears that the court below has only considered the argument between the parties with regard to date of death and then posted the case for evidence.

3. In such circumstances, by the impugned order, no prejudice has been caused to either of the parties nor it occasioned failure of justice, as such, no case for supervisory jurisdiction is made out. Thus, this writ application is dismissed.

brajesh/-                                          (Mungeshwar Sahoo, J)
    U