Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. - (1.) Heard Mr. J.J. Sanga, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Venkateshwar Gopal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1. None appears on behalf of the other respondents in spite of valid service of notice.
(2.) In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 14.06.2013 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Munsif, Ranchi in Title Suit No. 48/2002, whereby and whereunder the intervention application preferred on behalf of the petitioner has been rejected.
(3.) A Title Suit has been preferred by the plaintiff/respondent Nos. 2 and 3 being Title Suit No. 48/2002 in which the following prayer was made: a) That the decree for cancellation of Deed No. 398, page Nos. 134 to 136 volume 8, Book No. I, dated 23.01.1941 comprising the area of Khata 92, Khewat No. 5, revenue Thana No. 178, Plot No. 519, area 88 decimals as mentioned in the Schedule A at the foot of the plaint be passed in favour of the plaintiff and also the proforma defendants 1 to 3 against the defendants 4 to 6. b) That the possession of the plaintiff over Khata No. 92 may not be disturbed by defendant Nos. 4 to 6. c) That the right, title and interest along with the possession be declared in respect of the land in question which is fully described in the Schedule A at the plaint which is the part and parcel of the plaintiff. d) That the cost of the suit be awarded in favour of the plaintiff and the deed fraudulently executed by defendants is invalid, in-operative deed and the direction to be given to the District Sub-Registrar, Ranchi for the cancellation of the deed i.e. deed No. 398 dated 23.01.1941, Book No. I, Volume No. 8, pages 134 to 136. e) Any relief or reliefs be awarded in favour of the plaintiff which is deem, fit and proper.;