High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Ashok Kumar Jha vs Vijay Kumar Mishra on 18 March, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Ashok Kumar Jha vs Vijay Kumar Mishra on 18 March, 2011
                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

                                   Letters Patent Appeal No.492 of 2011
                                                     IN
                                        C.W.J.C. No. 15338 of 2010
                                                    With
                                           I.A. No. 2201 of 2011

                  ====================================================
                  Ashok Kumar Jha, S/o Late Ayodhya Jha, R/o Village- Balia, P.S.-
                  Benipatti, District-Madhubani.
                                                                 ...... Petitioner/Appellant
                                                   Versus
                  Vijay Kumar Mishra, S/o Sri Jata Shankar Mishra, R/o Village-Baiyalpur
                  Arer, P.S.-Arer, District-Madhubani. ... Respondent/ Respondent
                  ====================================================
                  APPEARANCE :
                  For the Appellant: Mr. Rajeev Roy, Advocate.

                  ====================================================
                  CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                             And
                           HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN
                  ORAL ORDER

(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

2. 18.03.2011 Re. Interlocutory Application No. 2201 of 2011:

This application under section 5 of the Limitation
Act is filed by the appellant for condonation of delay of 56
days occurred in filing the Letters Patent Appeal.

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case,
the delay is condoned.

Interlocutory Application stands disposed of.
Re. Letters Patent Appeal No. 492 of 2011:

This Appeal preferred under clause 10 of the
Letters Patent arises from the judgment and order dated 6th
December 2010 passed by the learned single Judge in
above C.W.J.C. No. 15338 of 2010.

The matter arises from Title Suit No. 106 of
2004 pending before the learned Sub Judge-II, Madhubani.

2

The learned single Judge has refused to
interfere in the pending suit. So do we. The impugned
order made by the learned trial court is a discretionary
order. We need not interfere with the discretion exercised
by the learned trial court.

No case for interference is made out.

The Appeal is dismissed in limine.


                                      (R.M. Doshit, CJ.)


Sujit                                 (Jyoti Saran, J.)