;n HiGH COURT OP CHHATTiSGARH AT BIL^PUR Writ Petition (Art.227)No.S286 of 201© Petitioners 1. Smt.lndu Sharma, widow of Late (Plaintiffs) Shlvroop Sharma, aged about 60 years. 2. Sudhir Sharma, Son of Late Shivroop Sharma. ag@d about 34 years. 3. Priyansh Sharma, Son of Shri Sudhir Sharma, aged about 11 years, a mjnor through his natural guardian Shri SudhirSharma Aii residents of Ware House Road, BJIaspur. TehsiS and DlstricE Bilaspur (CG), through Generai Power of Attorney holdsr Smt.ShiSpa Sharma, aged about 33 years, wife of Shri Sudhir Sharma, Proprletor-Sharma Photocopiers Fax S Lamiraation Center. Bitaspur, resident of Ware House Road, Bilaspur, Tehsii and District BJSaspur (CG) Veraus 1. Suresh Sharma, aged about 53 years, Son of Late Shivroop Sharma. 2. Smt.Lily Sharma, aged about SO years, wife of Shri Suresh Sharma. 3. Nihar Sharma, aged about 24 years, Son of Shri Suresh Sharma. No.1 to 3 are residents of Shanksy Nagar, Behind ths residence of the Chief Mlnister, Executive Enginser Bungalow, Raipur, Tehsil and Distrlct Raipur (CG) 4. Smt.Shobha Kushwaha.widow of Late R.S. Kushwaha, aged about 54 years, resident of M/211, Ashiyana Colony, Kanpur Roci, Lucknow (U.P.) 5. Smt.Shashi Hingankar, wife of Shri Rajesh Hingankar. aged about 38 years, resident of Bungaiow of AdditionaJ Superintendent of Poiice (City), Sndore (MP) S. State of Chhattisgarh, through th© Coliector, Bilaspur (CG) Respondents (defendants) \ ^_ (Writ Petition under Articie 227 ofthe Constitutton of India) Mr.B.P.Sharma, counseS forthe petitioners. Mr.Shree Kumar Agrawal, Senior Advocate with Mr.Akhit Agrawal, counsel for respondents No.1 to 5. Ms Sangeeta Mishra, Panel Lawyer for respondent No.Q/State. <SB: Hon'ble Mr. T.P. Sharma, J.) ORDER(ORAL) (30-8-2011) 1. By this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of tndia the petitioners have chalienged the legality & propriety of th@ order dated 25,3.2010 passed bythe 8* AddJtional District Judge (F.T.C.), Biiaspur in Civil Suit No.40A/09. 2. After some arguments, tearned counsei for the petitiohQrs submtts ftiat the genuineness of will alisged executed by predecessor-in-titls of th@ parties late Shivroop Sharma is in question between the parttes. The petitioners have pieaded reSating to wiil in their plaint but they have not specificalSy pleaded, vaiued and ciaimed the relief reiating to such wflii, therefore, with a view to decid®controversy finaiSy, he seeks to withdraw this writ petition wsth isberty to file appropriato amendment applicatjon in ploading, especialiy reiating to genuineness/forgery of alleged wij}, claim of reltef reiating to such document and valuation in their plaint. Considering the pieading of the parties and for just decision of the dispute, aforesaid amendment appears to be necessary. 3. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn \Arith tt?e aforesaid liberty. !n case, parties amended their pleading, tho Court b©low wouid b©under obligation to frame addittonal issue reiating to wiil. No order as to costs. 4. Snterim application stands disposed oi Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge ^