Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3171 (JHR)

BHOLA DHOBI v. NARAYAN MAHTO

SA/6/2024 · 2025-01-06

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

--1-- S.A. No. 6 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI S.A. No. 06 of 2024 ---- 1. Bhola Dhobi, aged about 38 years 2. Shibu Dhobi, aged about 35 years 3. Binod Dhobi, aged about 30 years All sons of Sukar Dhobi, resident of Village – Nagrikala, PO – Chandor, PS – Tetulmari, District - Dhanbad .... Appellants -- Versus -- Narayan Mahto, son of Late Ramchandra Mahato, Resident of Village – Nagrikala, PO – Chandor, PS – Tetulmari, District – Dhanbad .... Respondents ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Appellants :- Mr. Sanjay Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent :- Mr. Ramchander Sahu, Advocate ---- 08/06.01.2025 Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. This second appeal has been filed being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 28.01.2015 passed by learned District Judge-II, Dhanbad in Misc. Appeal No.113 of 2009 whereby he has been pleased to dismiss the said appeal and confirm the order dated 29.06.2009 passed by learned Revenue Officer, Dhanbad in CNT Suit No.392 of 2006. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that there is delay of 2405 days in filing of the second appeal and in view of that I.A. No.8901 of 2024 has been filed for condonation of delay. He submits that the reasons are provided therein as the father was pursuing the suit and the appellants were not knowing about the suit, later on father died --2-- S.A. No. 6 of 2024 and thereafter, they came to know about the suit and the appeal and in view of that the said delay has occurred. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that not even a single cheat of the paper is annexed to the said I.A. and the delay is not explained in the said I.A. and in view of that the said delay may not be condoned. 5. After some argument, learned counsel appearing for the appellants seeks permission to withdraw the second appeal to follow the observation made by the learned Appellate Court. 6. Accordingly, this second appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. 7. Pending petition, if any, is also disposed of. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Sangam/