Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 16449 (JHR)

SMT. KISHORI DEVI ALIAS KISHORI DEVI v. ANIL GARG

C.M.P./563/2025 · 2025-07-08

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:18262 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI ---- C.M.P. No. 563 of 2025 ---- 1.Smt. Kishori Devi@ Kishori Devi aged about 47 years wife of Anil Paswan 2.Anil Paswan @ Anil Sinha aged about 51 years son of late Shivnath Paswan @ Shiv Nath Sinha @ Shibnath Yadav 3.Ajay Paswan @ Ajay Sinha aged about 34 years son of Anil Paswan @ Anil Sinha 4.Udit Paswan@ Udit Sinha, aged about 30 years son of Anil Paswan @ Anil Sinha, All are resident of Village Kapali, Dobo PO Kapali PS Kapali District Seraikella -Kharsawan …… …. … Petitioner(s) -- Versus -- 1.Anil Garg son of late Prem Narayan Garg 2.Sunil Garg, son of late Prem Narayan Garg, both are resident of House No.19, C.H.Area East, Bistupur, PO and PS Bistupur, Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand 3.Gobind Prasad Agarwal, son of late Satya Narayan Dodrajka, resident of Flat No.3 and 4, 2nd floor Block B Golf Green, Holding No.4, Loyla School Area, Bistupur, PO and PS Bistupur, Jamshedpur, District East Sinbhbhum, Jharkhand 4.The Deputy Commissioner, Seraikella- Kharsawan, having its office at Collectorate Building, Seraikella, PO and PS Seraikella, District Seraikella- Kharsawan …… …. … Opposite Party(s) ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhay Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party(s) : Mr. Chanchal Jain, Advocate For the O.P./State :- Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate ---- 4/08.07.2025 After some argument, Mr. Abhay Kumar Mishra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the instant petition with liberty to move before the learned court by way of filing appropriate petition by adding the Deputy Commissioner as party. 2. Learned counsel for the O.P.Nos.1 and 2 submits that he has got no objection so far as the withdrawal of the CMP is concerned, however, he is having the right to oppose any application before the learned court. 3. In view of above, this petition is dismissed as withdrawn. 4. Pending petition if any also stands disposed of. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) SI/