Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Gango Mahto and ors Vs. Ganesh Mahto and ors

Gango Mahto and ors vs Ganesh Mahto and ors

Type Court Judgment Court Jharkhand Decided Sep 20, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1086331

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Jharkhand High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Gango Mahto and ors

Respondent

Ganesh Mahto and ors

Excerpt

in the high court of jharkhand at ranchi s.a. no. 311 of 2002 gango mahto & others …..appellants versus ganesh mahto & others .….respondents ----- coram:hon’ble mr. justice narendra nath tiwari for the appellants : mr. nawal kishore prasad, advocate for the respondents : mr. manjul prasad, advocate ---- i.a. no. 2048 of 2013 and i.a. no. 2049 o”15. 20-09-2013 the appellants have prayed for substitution of the heirs and legal representatives of respondent no. 7 after condoning the delay in filing application for substitution. it has been stated that respondent no. 7 namely jitan mahto died in the month of november, 2011 leaving behind his widow and sons as heirs and legal representatives. their names and addresses are described in paragraph 2 of i.a. no. 2048/2013. it has been submitted that appellant no. 1 is the pairvikar. he is an old man and suffering from multiple ailments. he is mostly confined to bed. he could know about the death of respondent no. 7 on 5.1.2013. the appellant thereafter collected the details of the heirs and legal representatives and contacted his counsel at ranchi. this application was thereafter filed without any delay. it has been further submitted that there was no wilful laches or delay on the part of the appellants and they were prevented from filing the application for substitution earlier under the aforesaid circumstance beyond their control. learned counsel for the respondents has not controverted the said facts and submissions and have not opposed the application. considering the above, the delay in filing the application for substitution is condoned. prayer for substitution is allowed. both the i.as are disposed of. ( narendra nath tiwari, j) rakesh/

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI S.A. No. 311 of 2002 Gango Mahto & Others …..Appellants Versus Ganesh Mahto & Others .….Respondents ----- Coram:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI For the Appellants : Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Manjul Prasad, Advocate ---- I.A. No. 2048 of 2013 and I.A. No. 2049 o”

15. 20-09-2013 The appellants have prayed for substitution of the heirs and legal representatives of respondent no. 7 after condoning the delay in filing application for substitution. It has been stated that respondent no. 7 namely Jitan Mahto died in the month of November, 2011 leaving behind his widow and sons as heirs and legal representatives. Their names and addresses are described in paragraph 2 of I.A. No. 2048/2013. It has been submitted that appellant no. 1 is the pairvikar. He is an old man and suffering from multiple ailments. He is mostly confined to bed. He could know about the death of respondent no. 7 on 5.1.2013. The appellant thereafter collected the details of the heirs and legal representatives and contacted his counsel at Ranchi. This application was thereafter filed without any delay. It has been further submitted that there was no wilful laches or delay on the part of the appellants and they were prevented from filing the application for substitution earlier under the aforesaid circumstance beyond their control. Learned counsel for the respondents has not controverted the said facts and submissions and have not opposed the application. Considering the above, the delay in filing the application for substitution is condoned. Prayer for substitution is allowed. Both the I.As are disposed of. ( Narendra Nath Tiwari, J) Rakesh/

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial