2025:JHHC:12706 --1-- C.M.P. No. 934 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI C.M.P. No. 934 of 2024 ---- Hardeep Singh Sidhu, aged about 64 years, S/o Late Darsan Singh, resident of Nanak Kutir, Plot Nos.107, 108 & 109, Khata No.61, Ward No.12, Mouza-Sakchi, Hem Singh Bagan, New Kalimati Road, Sakchi, PO and PS – Golmuri, Town – Jamshedpur, District – East Singhbhum (Jharkhand) .... Petitioner -- Versus -- Harcharan Singh, S/o Late Surender Singh, resident of Hem Singh Bagan, New Kalimati Road, Sakchi, PO and PS – Golmuri, Town – Jamshedpur, District – East Singhbhum (Jharkhand) .... Opposite Parties ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Advocate For the O.P. :- Mr. J.N. Upadhyay, Advocate :- Mr. Mayank Kumar, Advocate :- Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate ---- 05/28.04.2025 Heard Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Jitendra Nath Upadhyay, learned counsel appearing for the sole opposite party. 2. This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside of the order dated 09.07.2024 passed by learned District Judge – I, Jamshedpur in Original Suit No.02 of 2022 arising out of Probate Case No.48 of 2013 whereby the petition filed by the petitioner under Order I Rule 10 of CPC has been rejected by the learned Court. 3. Mr. Das, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner herein submits that the Original Suit No.02 of 2022 has been instituted for 2025:JHHC:12706 --2-- C.M.P. No. 934 of 2024 probate of the will executed by Hem Singh, who has left for his heavenly abode on 07.06.1982. He submits that it has come to the knowledge of the petitioner herein and in view of that petition under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC has been filed for impleading Kalyan Bhumij and Mohan Bhumij in the said original suit, however, the learned Court has rejected the same on the ground that they are not necessary party and to buttress this argument he refers to supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner wherein the document with regard to the plot in question has been annexed suggesting that Plot No.820 and 822 of Khata No.10 and 79 respectively has been recorded in the name of Kalyan Bhumij and Mohan Bhumij and the rent receipts are also issued in their favour which is also brought on the record in the supplementary affidavit . He submits that so far the other plots are concerned that is of the government and in spite of that the learned Court has rejected the same. He submits in view of that the petitioners are the necessary party. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the sole opposite party opposes the prayer and submits that the property in question was purchased by Late Hem Singh, who has executed the will in favour of their legal heirs/successors, who are the petitioners in the original suit and in view of that the learned Court has rightly passed the order. 5. If such a situation is there and prima facie at least two of the plots are in the name of Kalyan Bhumij and Mohan Bhumij and the rent receipts are also issued in favour of them and other plots of the same khata are in the name of the Government and that is fortified in view of the information provided by the Circle Officer, Mango which has been obtained by the petitioner herein under the Right to Information Act. 2025:JHHC:12706 --3-- C.M.P. No. 934 of 2024 Prima facie, it transpires that Kalyan Bhumij and Mohan Bhumij are also having the interest in the property in question which is the subject matter of will and in view of that the Kalyan Bhumij and Mohan Bhumij are necessary party. In light of sub-section C of Section 283, the citations are required to be made upon all persons claiming to have any interest in the estate of the deceased to come and see the proceeding before grant of probate or letter of administration and in that view of the matter two bhumij are said to be the interested persons and if the probate case become contentious the provisions are made under Section 295 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and it is required to be dealt with in manner of the suit and it has been pointed out that it has already been converted into the title suit and in that view of the matter impugned order dated 09.07.2024 is hereby set aside. 6. The petition filed by the petitioner under Order I Rule 10 of CPC is hereby allowed. 7. The learned Court will allow to make two bhumij as respondent in the said suit and will proceed in accordance with law. 8. This petition is disposed of. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Sangam/ A.F.R.