IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
FA No.690 of 1978
SMT JASODA DEVI & ORS
Versus
RAMESHWAR MAHTO & ORS
-----------
40. 19.01.2011 The learned counsel for the appellants
submitted that by terms of order dated 27.10.2010, the
respondent nos.4 to 7, 10, 11 and 15 were declared as
major but instead of 4 to 7, 10, 11 and 15, it has been
wrongly typed as respondent nos.4 to 11 and 15.
(2) From perusal of the memo of appeal, it is
evident that respondent nos.8 and 9 were major on the
date of filing of the appeal itself. It appears that it is a
typing mistake and therefore, it is corrected and made
clear that the respondent nos.4 to 7, 10, 11 and 15
were declared as major and the appellant is required to
take steps for appeal notice on them.
(3) The learned counsel for the appellant
submitted that in fact, earlier respondent nos.8 and 9
had appeared in this appeal. However, in view of the
order passed by this Court, he had already taken steps
and notices were served, as pointed out by the office in
the office note. From the office note, it appears that
the appeal notice of respondent nos.4 to 7 has been
received by Nawal Kishore Prasad and likewise, the
notice on respondent nos.10 and 15 has been received
by Sagar Prasad. The learned counsel submitted that
2
he will file affidavit showing jointness of Nawal Kishore
Prasad with respondent nos.4 to 7 and Sagar Prasad
with respondent no.10. However, he submitted that he
will take fresh steps for appeal notice on respondent
no.15 within one week under registered post.
(4) Therefore, the appellant shall file the
jointness affidavit within one week and shall also take
steps for appeal notice on respondent no.15 within said
period under registered cover.
Saurabh (Mungeshwar Sahoo, J.)