( 2025:JHHC:10789) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 1286 of 2023 1. Sukra Oraon, aged about 53 years, son of late Budhu Oraon 2. Laxman Oraon, aged abut 28 years, son of late Telanga Oraon 3. Bishwa Oraon, aged about 56 years, son of late Mahli Oraon 4. Manoj Oraon, aged about 26 years, son of late Biguwa Oraon 5. Sukra Oraon, aged about 44 years, son of late Mahli Oraon 6. Gabbay Oraon, aged about 39 years, son of late Mahli Oraon All are residents of village Hishri Chauli, P.O. Ratu, P.S. Ratu, District- Ranchi,Jharkhand …… Petitioners Versus 1. Mariam Khalkho, wife of Leelan Khalkho, daughter of late Susna Tirkey, Resident of village Khatanga Sarana Toli, Lapung, P.O. Kakaria, P.S. Lapung, District-Ranchi (Jharkhand) 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, P.O., G.P.O., Ranchi, P.S. Kotwali, District- Ranchi …… Opposite Parties CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioners : Mr. Ramchander Sahu, Advocate For the State : Mr. Nawal Kishore Pandey, Advocate 03/Dated: 08/04/2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. 2. This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside order dated 22.12.2022 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-VII, Ranchi in Civil Misc. Appeal No. 06 of 2022 and also for setting aside order dated 30.04.2022 passed in Misc. Civil Application No. 229 of 2021 in Original Suit No. 1836 of 2019 pending in the Court of learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) XXIII, Ranchi . 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Original Suit No.1836 of 2019 was instituted for declaration of right, title and interest over the land mentioned in schedule of the plaint. He submits that in the said suit, petition under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with section 151 of C.P.C has been filed before the learned court which was rejected inspite of prima facie case and balance of convenience in favour of the petitioners. He submits that the said order was challenged before the learned appellate court in Civil Misc. ( 2025:JHHC:10789) Appeal No. 06 of 2022 which has been rejected by order dated 22.12.2022. He submits that the learned appellate court has further erred in not appreciating the ingredients of Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with section 151 of C.P.C. He submits that the said order may kindly be set aside. 4. It is an admitted fact that the suit was instituted for declaration of right, title and interest over the land mentioned in schedule of the plaint. In that suit petition under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with section 151 of C.P.C has been filed which has been rejected by the learned court and the same was challenged before the learned appellate court in Civil Misc. Appeal No. 06 of 2022 which has been rejected by order dated 22.12.2022 affirming the order of the learned trial court. 5. Learned court appreciating the case of both sides has found that possession of property and title is in question and both the parties are claiming possession on the disputed property in view of that the learned court has held that prima facie case is not in favour of the plaintiff and vague statement was made with regard to prevention of sons of defendant no.1 and nothing specific was disclosed in the nature of loss and how such loss that cannot be compensated in money and thus the learned court has been pleased to reject the same which was challenged before the learned first appellate court and the learned first appellate court further appreciated the arguments and has found that prima facie case is not made out as both the parties are in possession over the property and the nature of loss was also not disclosed. 6. The Court finds that both the orders are correct and there is no perversity in both the orders. As such this petition is dismissed. Pending I.A, if any, stands dismissed. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Satyarthi/