Ram Krishna Chaudhary v. Sita Devi
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
The Civil Revision application stands allowed
Provisions considered
Judgment
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER
#07. 09-08-2012 Mr. Bhavesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shri Prakash Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties are present. This Civil Revision is directed against the order dated
17.01.2009 passed by learned Civil Judge, Junior Division-2nd , Samastipur in Title Suit No. 6 of 2008, whereby on a petition filed on behalf of the opposite parties, the learned court below has held the suit having abated in terms of Section 4(C ) of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 . A supplementary affidavit has been filed today enclosing an information provided by the Department of Revenue and Land Patna High Court C.R. No.261 of 2009 (7) dt.09-08-2012 2 Reforms, Government of Bihar under the Right to Information Act and whereunder it has been mentioned that no consolidation proceedings is continuing at Mauza Laguniya Raghukanth, P.S. 195, Circle-Samastipur, District-Samastipur. Learned counsel thus submits that in view of the said position the order impugned cannot be sustained. The position is admitted by learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties. In the result, the order impugned dated 17.01.2009 is quashed and set aside. As the suit is of the year 2008, learned Trial court would consider and dispose of the suit expeditiously and in accordance with law. The Civil Revision application stands allowed. S.Sb/- (Jyoti Saran, J)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The Civil Revision application stands allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 — s. 4(C); Right to Information Act, 2005.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.