1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 1110 of 2024 Birendra Kumar Singh, aged about 49 years, son of late Damodar Singh, resident of Dhela Toli, Tiril, P.O. and P.S. Sadar, District- Ranchi (Jharkhand) ….. Petitioner Versus 1. Vijay Kumar Singh, son of late Damodar Singh, resident of Dhela Toli, Tiril, P.O. and P.S. Sadar, District-Ranchi (Jharkhand) 2. Bhawesh Kumar Singh, son of late Damodar Singh, resident of Dhela Toli, Tiril, P.O. and P.S. Sadar, District-Ranchi (Jharkhand) …... Opposite Parties ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J. --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Amar Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Sandeep Verma, Advocate For the Opp. Party : ---- 03/06.01.2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the order dated 24.06.2024 passed by learned Civil Judge, Junior Division-XXIV, Ranchi in Original Suit No. 05 of 2016 contained in Annexure-5 whereby petition filed by the plaintiff under Order VI Rule 17 C.P.C. and under Order VII Rule 14 (3) of C.P.C have been allowed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said suit is meant for eviction and the plaintiff and the defendants are full brothers. He submits that the said document was allowed to bring on record that has been done by the learned court in the year 2024 and the suit was instituted in the year, 2016 and photocopy of the document was not filed along with list of document in view of that the order of the learned court is not in accordance with law. 4. It is an admitted position that the plaintiff and defendants are full brothers and said petition was filed under Order VI Rule 17 as well as under Order VII Rule 14 (3) of C.P.C. The learned court considering that the said document was sale deed which was 2 found by the defendants later on, has allowed the petition and the said document was taken on record. If such a situation is there and the suit is meant for eviction of the brothers and the said document was not in possession of the defendants as well as plaintiff and it was found later on, the learned court has rightly passed the said order and that has been done to decide the said suit in its right perspective. 5. There is no illegality in the said order accordingly, this petition is dismissed. Pending I.A. if any, stands disposed of. However, dismissal of this petition will not prejudice the case of either party. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J) Satyarthi