Binod Tirkey vs Somra Tirkey and Others

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J

This Second Appeal shall be heard on the following substantial question of law:

“(1) Whether the finding recorded by the appellate court referring to any relying upon section 52 of the Indian Easement Act, in absence of any evidence of leave and license allegedly pleaded by the plaintiff and by reversing the finding recorded by the trial court without any such evidence and in view of that the findings recorded by the learned appellate court are vitiated on account of perversity or not?”

(2) Whether the judgment of the learned first appellate court is vitiated on account of non-consideration of the description of the suit premises in light of Exhibit-B which is confined to holding No.659 whereas, the impugned judgment relates to holding No.658 and 659 both and on this score the judgment of the learned first appellate court is perverse or not?

Issue notice upon the respondent nos. 1 to 3 by registered post with A/d as well as under ordinary process for which requisites etc must be filed within two weeks.

Respondent No.4 is Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur and in view of that Mr. Sahani, the learned counsel will serve two copies of the Second Appeal upon Mr. Ashutosh Anand, the learned AAG-III and Mr. Ashutosh Anand, the learned counsel will take instruction and assist the Court on behalf of the respondent No.4.

Let name of Mr. Ashutosh Anand, the learned counsel be reflected in the cause list on behalf of the respondent no.4.

Respondent No.5 is M/s Tata Steel Limited.

Mr. A.K. Das, the learned counsel usually appears on behalf of M/s Tata Steel Limited and in view of that, Mr. Sahani, the learned counsel will serve two copies of Second Appeal upon Mr. Das, the learned counsel in course of the day.

Mr. Das, the learned counsel will take instruction and assist the Court.

Let name of Mr. A.K.Das, the learned counsel be reflected in the cause list on behalf of the respondent No.5.

Call for the Trial Court Records.