1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 1122 of 2024 1. Richa Roy, daughter of late Pradeep Roy, aged about 34 years 2. Mahuwa Seal, daughter of late Ram Mohan Roy, aged about 65 years 3. Sharmila Roy, daughter of late Ram Mohan Roy, aged about 45 years 4. Arpita Singh @ Mona Roy, daughter of late Ram Mohan Roy, aged about 45 years 5. Dipanita Roy @ Sachin Kaushar, daughter of late Ram Mohan Roy, aged about 50 years All residents of 123 Upper Chitpur Road, Kolkata-6, P.O. Chitpur Road, P.S. Chitpur Road, District-Kolkata, West Bengal Petitioner nos. 2 to 5 represented through their duly constituted Power of Attorney Holder Kamlendra Kumar, son of Markandey Jha, aged about 47 years, resident of Chakrabarty Lane, Near Bajrangbali Mandir, Deoghar, P.O. Deoghar, P.S. Deoghar, District- Deoghar, Jharkhand ….. Petitioner Versus 1. Deoghar Nagar Nigam, having its office at Court Road, Deoghar, P.O. Deoghar, P.S. Deoghar, District-Deoghar, Jharkhand represented through the Mayor, Deoghar Nagar Nigam, Deoghar 2. Chief Executive Officer, Deoghar Nagar Nigam, Court Road, Deoghar, P.O. Deoghar, P.S. Deoghar, District-Deoghar, Jharkhand …... Opposite Parties ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J. --- For the Petitioners : Mr. J.J. Sanga, Advocate Mr. Randhir Kr. Sharma, Advocate Mr. Anand Prakash, Advocate For the Opp. Parties : Mr. Vijay Shankar Jha, Advocate ---- 04/06.01.2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the opposite parties. 2. This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 24.06.2024 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) VII, Deoghar in M.C.A. Case 2 No. 296/2023 arising out of Original Suit No. 164 of 2011 whereby M.C.A. No. 296/2023 filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs has been dismissed for non compliance of order of the Court. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Original Suit No. 164 of 2011 was instituted for declaration of right, title and interest of the suit land and the petitioners happened to be plaintiffs. He submits that proceeding in the suit was going on several occasion and the matter was heard. Thereafter during pendency of the said suit a petition under Order VI, Rule 17 of the C.P.C. read with section 151 C.P.C. was filed before the learned court which was rejected by the impugned order on the ground that court’s order was not complied. Learned counsel for the petitioner took the court to orders dated 11.07.2023, 28.08.2023, 11.09.2023, 12.10.2023. 04.01.2024, 17.01.2024, 13.05.2024 and 06.06.2024 respectively and submits that hearing of the suit was going on however, the learned court has dismissed the petition on the ground that order of the Court has not been complied. He further submits that there is no direction to the petitioners to comply anything inspite of that the said order has been passed. He further submits that there is no other ground to reject the said petition. 4. Mr. Vijay Shankar Jha, learned counsel for the opposite parties submits that learned court has passed the order on the ground that court’s order has not been complied. 5. On query made by the Court from Mr. Jha, he submits that hearing in the suit was going on. 6. In view of above submissions of the learned counsel for the parties the court has gone through the impugned orders along with ordersheets dated 11.07.2023, 28.08.2023, 11.09.2023, 12.10.2023. 04.01.2024, 17.01.2024, 13.05.2024 and 06.06.2024. It appears that only ground for rejection of the petition filed under Order VI Rule 17 read with section 151 C.P.C. is non compliance of order of the court however in the entire ordersheet brought on record it appears that hearing of the suit was going on. There is no direction to comply anything inspite of that the said order has been passed. It appears that the said order is erroneous one. Accordingly, order dated 24.06.2024 is set aside and the petition filed under Order VI 3 Rule 17 read with section 151 C.P.C. is restored. The learned court will pass a fresh order in accordance with law by providing opportunities to the parties. 6. This petition is allowed and disposed of. Pending I.A. if any, stands disposed of. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J) Satyarthi