IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Appeal No.419 of 2010
Kailash Devi wife of Shyam Nandan Singh, resident of village
Jaitpur, P.S. Barhaiya, District Lakhisarai.
... ... Appellant
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Balmiki Prasad Singh, Son of Late Sahdeo Singh, resident of
village Ganga Sarai, P.S. Barahiya, District Lakhisarai.
... ... Respondents.
with
Miscellaneous Appeal No.418 of 2010
1. Sri Surendar Singh.
2. Sri Rajendar Singh.
3. Sri Subodh Singh.
All sons of late Ram Udgar Singh, resident of village
Sherpur, P.S. Maranchi, District Patna.
... ... Appellants.
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Balmiki Prasad Singh, Son of Late Sahdeo Singh, resident of
village Ganga Sarai, P.S. Barhaiya, District Lakhisarai.
... ... Respondents.
----------------------------------
7. 17.10.2011. Since both the appeals arise out of
the common order, both the appeals are being
disposed of by the common order.
The present appeals have been
preferred under Section 299 of India
Succession Act against an order dated
22.10.2009 passed in Probate Case No.17 of
2007 by A.D.J./F.T.C. Vth, Lakhisarai,
whereby the prayer of the appellants for
intervention was dismissed.
Shri Umesh Prasad Singh, learned
Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of
respondent no.2, while referring to averment
made in paragraph-6 of the affidavit filed
2
on behalf of respondent no.2 submits that
during pendency of the present appeals, the
probate case has already been decided by
judgment dated 30.6.2010. He further points
out that a suit vide Title Suit No.76 of
2010 has been preferred for declaration of
the title and confirmation of possession and
same is also pending.
In view of the fact that during
pendency of the present appeals, the probate
case has already been decided, no purpose
would be served in keeping the matter
pending, which were filed primarily for
setting aside of an order whereby prayer for
intervention/addition of party of the
appellant in probate case was rejected.
The court is of the opinion that
both the appeals have now become
infructuous.
Accordingly, both the appeals stand
disposed of.
N.H./ ( Rakesh Kumar,J.)