IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
MJC No.2023 of 2010
1(a). Munni Devi, daughter of Late Chandeshwar Rai, wife
of Shri Uttam Chandra Singh, Police Line, Dandus
Point S.Andman.
1(b). Miss Rinku Singh, daughter of late Devanti Singh at
present living with her father Dinesh Singh at Quarter
No.536 "A" Bichia Railway Colony, Gorakhpur, U.P.
1(c) Miss Tinku Singh, daughter of late Devanti Singh, at
present living with her father Dinesh Singh at Quarter
No.536 "A" Bichia Railway Colony, Gorakhpur, U.P.
1(d). Smt. Indu Singh, daughter of Late Chandeshwar Rai
@ Chandeshwar Singh, wife of Shri Prabhunath Singh
of village- Bachhar, Post Office- Salampur, District-
Devaria, U.P.
1(e) Smt. Vajayanti Singh, daughter of late Chandeshwar
Rai, @ Chandeshwar Singh, wife of Tarkeshwar Singh
of village- Majhaulia, Post Office- Lar Bazar, District-
Devaria, U.P.
1(f) Smt. Gayatri Singh, daughter of late Shri Chandeshwar
Singh, wife of Vindhyachal Singh of village- Pipra
Chouraha, New Neha Electronic Centre, Post Office-
Lar Bazar, District- Dewaria, U.P.
1(g) Shri Narendra Kumar Singh, son of late Chandeshwar
Rai of village- Dhamour, Post Office- Sarharwa,
District- Siwan (Bihar).
1(h) Sri Rabindra Kumar Singh, son of late Chandeshwar
Rai alias Chandeshwar Singh of Village- Dhamour,
Post Office- Sarharwa, District- Siwan, Bihar.
2. Harendra Singh @ Harendra Rai, son of Janak Rai.
3. Paihari Singh @ Paihari Rai, son of Rajaram Rai.
4. Jagdish Singh @ Jagdish Rai, son of Rajaram Rai.
5. Devendra Kumar Singh @ Devendra Rai, son of
Rajaram Rai.
All are resident of Village- Dhamour, P.S.
Miarwa, District- Siwan.
....Defendant-Appellants- Petitioners.
Versus
MANAGER RAI, son of Ram Briksh Rai @ Briksha Rai,
resident of Village- Dhamaur, P.S. Mairwa, District- Siwan.
.....Plaintiff-respondent- Opp. Party.
-----------
2
07- 22.06.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. This
application has been filed by the appellants of F.A.
No.156 of 1993, for restoration of the appeal which stood
dismissed on account of non-compliance of the
peremptory order passed by the Bench on 15.9.2003.
2. We have perused the materials on record and
considered the submissions of learned counsel for the
parties. The appeal arises out of partition suit which was
decreed. By order dated 25.7.2003, passed in the appeal,
as prayed for by learned counsel for the appellants, the
learned Lawazima Board had granted thirty days’ final
time to file the appellants’ list and deposit of initial
printing costs. Not having been complied with, it was
placed before the Bench on 15.9.2003, on which date
three weeks’ time was granted for the purpose. Not
having been complied with, the appeal stood dismissed.
The present restoration application was filed after delay
of nearly seven years. It appears to be a case of laches
and negligence.
3. This application is rejected.
(S K Katriar, J.)
S.K.Pathak/