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 1]

Patna High Court - Orders

Dr. Amarendra Roy Chaudhary vs Sri Lalit Mohan Roy Chaudhary & Ors on 10 December, 2015

Author: Mungeshwar Sahoo

Bench: Mungeshwar Sahoo

                Patna High Court CWJC No.1529 of 2014 (2) dt.10-12-2015




                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                           Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1529 of 2014
                            ======================================================
                            Dr. Amarendra Roy Chaudhary
                                                                                 .... .... Petitioner/s
                                                              Versus
                            Sri Lalit Mohan Roy Chaudhary & Ors
                                                                                .... .... Respondent/s
                            ======================================================
                            Appearance :
                            For the Petitioner/s    :    Mr. Partha Sarthy
                            For the Respondent/s      : Mr.
                            ======================================================
                            CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR
                            SAHOO
                            ORAL ORDER
2       10-12-2015

The learned senior counsel, Mr. Ram Suresh Rai, for the petitioner submitted that the provision of Order XVIII Rule 17 is to sparing exercise and in appropriate cases and not a general rule merely on the ground that his recall and re-examination would not cause any prejudice to the parties as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in AIR 2009 SC 1604 Vadiraj Naggappa Vernekar Vs. Sharad Chand Prabhakar Gogate but by the impugned order the Court below allowed the application filed by the plaintiff to recall D.W.1 in a routine manner.

Issue notice to the plaintiff respondent Nos.1 to 5 only in admission matter for which the petitioner shall file the necessary requisites in ordinary process as well as registered post both within two weeks. Peremptory.

In the meantime, the operation of the impugned order dated 02.12.2013 passed in Title Suit No.221 of 1996 pending in the Court of Sub Judge III, Buxar/transferee Court shall remain stayed.

(Mungeshwar Sahoo, J) Sanjeev/-

      U            T