2025:JHHC:36060 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI S.A. No. 115 of 2018 1. Ramesh Chandra Ghoshal, aged about 75 years, son of Late Kali Pado Ghoshal, resident of Main Road, Chas, P.O. & P.S. Chas, District Bokaro, Jharkhand … … Original Plaintiff/Appellant/Appellant 2. Smt. Kalpana Ghoshal, aged about 65 years, wife of Late Harish Chandra Ghoshal 3. Rabindra Nath Ghoshal, aged about 41 years, Son of Harish Chandra Ghoshal 4. Amit Kumar Ghoshal, aged about 38 years, Son of Late Harish Chandra Ghoshal (2), (3) & (4), all residents of Main Road, Chas, P.O. & P.S. Chas, District Bokaro, Jharkhand 5. Smt. Mohuwa Chatterjee, aged about 36 years, wife of Raja Chatterjee and daughter of Late Harish Chandra Ghoshal, resident of Palika Bazar, Deoghar, P.O., P.S. & District Deoghar, Jharkhand … … Substituted Plaintiffs/Appellants/Appellants Versus Sri Dhananjoy Mondal, son of Late Hari Ram Mondol, resident of Village Narayanpur, Tolla – Chatamara, P.O. Narayanpur, P.S. Pindrajora, District Bokaro, Jharkhand … … Defendant/Respondent/Respondent --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Appellants : Mr. Atanu Banerjee, Advocate For the Respondent : --- 15/18th November 2025 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant. 2. This second appeal has been filed by the plaintiffs against concurrent findings recorded by both the courts. 3. The learned trial court had dismissed the suit vide judgment dated 20.03.2017 (decree dated 28.03.2017) passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bokaro in Title Suit No. 37 of 2007. The learned 1st appellate court has affirmed the judgment 20.03.2017 vide judgment dated 2025:JHHC:36060 2 30.11.2017 (decree drawn on 12.12.2017) passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Bokaro in Civil Appeal No. 16 of 2017. 4. The learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that under similar circumstances S.A. No. 366 of 2019 arising out of the judgment passed in Title Suit No. 36 of 2007 has been dismissed. He submits that the two cases arise out of two different sale deeds. The learned counsel submits that in S.A. No. 336 of 2019, the Court found no substantial question of law and the second appeal was dismissed vide judgment dated 08.05.2025. 5. The learned counsel submits that the present second appeal is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment and accordingly he submits that there is no substantial question of law involved in this case. 6. Considering the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant that there is no substantial question of law involved in this case, this second appeal is dismissed. 7. Pending I.A., if any, is closed. 8. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court concerned through ‘e-mail/FAX’. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) 18.11.2025 Mukul/- Uploaded On: 05.12.2025