Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SANTU versus JAGARNATH AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Santu v. Jagarnath And Others - SECOND APPEAL No. 2694 of 1982 [2006] RD-AH 16387 (19 September 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

19-09-2006 Hon'ble S.P. Mehrotra, J.  

Order on

Civil Misc.(Correction) Application No. 191916 of 2006.

It appears that consequent to the death of Jagannath (defendant-respondent No. 1), Civil Misc. (Substitution) Application No. 216217 of 2005 has been filed for bringing on record the heirs and legal preventatives of the said Jagannath (defendant-respondent No. 1).

In the said Substitution Application, the name of one of the proposed heirs and legal representatives of the said Jagannath (defendant-respondent No. 1) was mentioned as "Jhapsi".

When the case was taken up on 4th August, 2006, Sri A.C. Tiwari, who has put in appearance on behalf of the proposed heirs and legal representatives of the said  Jagannath (defendant-respondent No.1) pointed out that the correct name of the said proposed heir and legal representative of Jagannath (defendant-respondent No. 1) was "Jhapsu" and not "Jhapsi".

In the circumstances, the aforementioned Civil Misc.(Correction) Application No. 191916 of 2006 has been filed on behalf of the plaintiff-appellant.

It is, inter-alia, prayed that the plaintiffs-appellants be permitted to correct the name of the aforesaid proposed heir and legal representative of Jagannath (defendant-respondent No. 1) by writing "Jhapsu" in place of "Jhaspi" as wrongly typed in the aforesaid Substitution Application.

The aforementioned Correction Application is supported by an Affidavit, sworn on 10th September, 2006.

I have heard Sri J.A. Azmi, learned counsel for the plaintiffs-appellants and Sri A.C. Tiwari, learned counsel for the proposed heirs and legal representatives of Jagannath (defendant-respondent No. 1), and perused the record.

Sri A.C.Tiwari, learned counsel for the proposed heir and legal representative of Jagannath (defendant-respondent No. 1) has fairly stated that he has no objection to the aforementioned Correction Application being allowed.

The aforementioned Correction Application is, accordingly, allowed.

Let necessary corrections be made in the aforesaid Substitution Application within two weeks.

The aforesaid Substitution Application will be  listed for consideration on o6th October, 2006.

Second Appeal No. 2694 of 82/AK


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.