2026:JHHC:3520 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No.104 of 2026 .... 1. Om Prakash Pandey @ Omkar Pandey, aged about 47 years 2. Dayanand Pandey, aged about 40 years 3. Panchanan Pandey, aged about 36 years 4. Sachidanand Pandey, aged about 34 years All sons of Krishandeo Pandey @ Krishna Nand Pandey, resident of Village- Balumath, P.O.-Balumath, P.S.-Balumath, District-Latehar .… Petitioners Versus 1. Krishnadeo Pandey @ Krishna Nand Pandey, aged about 66 years, son of Late Pun Pratap Pandey 2. Sharita Devi, aged about 49 years, second wife of Sri Krishnadeo Pandey @ Krishna Nand Pandey 3. Khushboo Pandey, aged about 27 years, daughter of Sri Krishna Nand Pandey 4. Deepak Pandey, aged about 24 years, son of Sri Krishnadeo Pandey @ Krishna Nand Pandey 5. Brij Mohan Khandelwal, aged about 49 years, son of Sri Rameshwar Khandelwal. 6. Smt. Mano Devi, aged about 60 years, wife of Sri Jagdish Sao 7. Akhilesh Kumar, aged about 49 years, son of Sri Suresh Pandey 8. Smt. Ram Sheela Devi, aged about 59 years, wife of Ashok Kumar Gupta 9. Surendra Prasad, aged about 56 years, son of Late Shiv Narayan Mahto 10. Suresh Ram, aged about 54 years, son of Koleshwar Ram 11. Vivek Kumar, aged about 26 years, son of Sri Suresh Ram, C/o Gita Real Estate Private Limited All resident of Village-Balumath, P.O. & P.S.-Balumath, District-Latehar .... Opposite Parties .... CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR For the Petitioners : Mr. Ramawatar Choubey, Adv. For the Opposite Parties : .... 02/10.02.2026 1. The present C.M.P. has been filed for setting aside the later part of the order dated 04.01.2022 (Anexure-3) passed in Original Suit No. 61/2021 by Sri Ravi Prakash Tiwari, the Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Latehar whereby the learned trial court has allowed the withdrawal of the petition partly without giving liberty to institute a fresh suit for the same cause of action in spite of the prayer made by the petitioner with the liberty though the pronouncement was made in the court the word allowed.” 2. The prayer made in the application which has been allowed by the impugned order reads as under:- “It is, therefore prayed that Your Honour may graciously be pleased to allow to withdraw the instant suit with a liberty to file fresh suits for 2026:JHHC:3520 -2- C.M.P. No.104 of 2026 different causes of action and different parties which he been included in the instant suit including the property mentioned in para -13((VII) of the instant plaint.” 3. The petitioner himself has left the cause of action existing for the suit, thus, there is no question of granting any liberty. 4. It has been further prayed that he want to array the different parties for different cause of action. 5. In view of the above, this Court finds no illegalities in the impugned order, accordingly, the present civil miscellaneous petition stands dismissed. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) 10.02.2026 Shahid/ Uploaded on 12.02.2026