Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2022 DAILYLAW 1452 (JHR)

SHEOPATI DEVI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

MA/153/2022 · 2026-02-09

Rajesh Kumar

body2022

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 M.A. No. 153 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI M.A. No. 153 of 2022 1. Sheopati Devi, aged about 80 years, w/o Late Arjun Kushwaha @ Arjun Mahto 2. Devnath Kushwaha @ Deonath Kushwaha, aged about 56 years, S/o Late Arjun Mahto @ Arjun Kushwaha. Both R/o Village – Pipari Khurd, P.O.-Pipari Kala, P.S.-Bishunpura, District- Garhwa. …....... Appellant(s) Vrs. 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Deputy Commissioner, Garhwa, At + P.O.+P.S.-Garhwa, District-Garhwa. 2. The Settlement Officer, Palamau, At + P.O.+P.S.-Daltonganj, District- Palamau. 3. The Additional Collector, Garhwa, At + P.O.+P.S.-Garhwa, District-Garhwa. 4. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Nagar Utari, At + P.O.+P.S.-Nagar Utari, District- Garhwa. 5. The Deputy Collector and Land Reform, Officer, Nagar Utari, At + P.O.+P.S.- Nagar Utari, District-Garhwa. 6. Circle Officer, Ramuna, Now Bishunpura, At + P.O.+P.S.-Bishunpura, District-Garhwa. 7. Jagdish Singh 8. Mandip Singh 9. Vijay Singh All son of Late Bachu Singh 10. Bhola Mahto, son of Late Mohar Mahto 11. Suresh Ram, son of Late Mahesh Ram 12. Gandip Ram @ Dilip Ram son of Awadhesh Ram 13. Moni Devi son of Awadhesh Ram 14. Dudun Ram 15. Raj Kumar Ram @ Mithu Ram Both son of Late Mahesh Ram 16. Mukhdeo Thakur, son of Late Nanhku Thakur 17. Kamalpati Devi Wife of Sukhdeo Thakur Respondent No.7 to 11 and 16 to 17 R/o Village-Pipari Khurd, P.O.- Pipari Kala, P.S. – Bishunpura, District-Garhwa. Respondent No.12 to 15 R/o Village – Ramuna, P.O.+P.S.- Ramuna, District – Garhwa. 18. Parsu Mahto son of Late Bhagwan Mahto 19. Prema Devi D/o Late Bhagwan Mahto 20. Prabha Devi wife of Late Bhagwan Mahto. Respondent no.18 to 20 R/o Village – Ramuna, P.O.+P.S.-Ramuna, District – Garhwa. 21. Nandu Mahto 22. Binod Mahto 23. Shambhu Mahto 24. Sheonath Mahto 25. Asarfi Mahto All sons of Late Sheo Mahto 26. Kunti Devi D/o Late Sheo Mahto Respondent No.21 to 25 R/o Village – Kocheya, P.O.-Kocheya, P.S.- Bishunpura, District-Garhwa. 2 M.A. No. 153 of 2022 27. Akhilesh Mahto 28. Mahindra Kumar Both sons of Late Basant Mahto, R/oVillage + P.O. – Renua, P.S.-Dudhi, District – Sonbhadra, Utar Pradesh. 29. Chapo Devi wife of Bacha Mehta @ Ramnath Mehat, R/o Village – Palhe, P.O.+P.S.- Nagar Utari, District-Garhwa. .......... Respondent(s) ….... CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR For the Appellant(s) : For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Ankit Kumar, A.C to S.C.-I 05/17.02.2026 The instant appeal has been listed today for modification of the order dated 09.02.2026, in the light of the Office note dated 16.02.2026, as per which in the order dated 09.02.2026, inadvertently, in the last paragraph (paragraph no. 5), it has been wrongly typed as Principal District & Sessions Judge, Hazaribag instead of Principal District & Sessions Judge, Garhwa. Further in the cause title the description of respondent no. 19 is not reflecting. 2. In that view of the matter, paragraph no. 5 of the order dated 09.02.2026 is corrected up to the extent that Principal District & Sessions Judge, Hazaribag shall be read as “Principal District & Sessions Judge, Garhwa”. 3. Further, it appears from the certified copy of the impugned order dated 08.04.2022 that the same was sent to the Court below for correction with regard to the valuation of the suit and details of parties. From the corrected certified copy, it appears that name of Respondent No. 19 is mentioned as Prema Devi D/o Late Bhagwan Mahto. 4. In that view of the matter, in the cause title of the order dated 09.02.2026, respondent no. 19 shall be read as “Prema Devi D/o Late Bhagwan Mahto”. 5. Accordingly, the order dated 09.02.2026 is modified to the aforesaid extent. Let the order dated 09.02.2026 be read along with present order. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) 17.02.2026 A. Mohanty Uploaded ____/____/2026