^' IfcC-- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.VLQ. ^H ^c / 2003 Petitioner (Plamfflf) lilg ^^^sw ^^•° '^^' y•'v' Pankaj Kumar Jain S/o Dhanya Kumar Jain, aged about 25 years R/o Neora, Tehsil Tilda, Dist: Raipur-(C.G.) (Note : The petitioner is a lega! ^»«<P^representative of deceased plaintiff .••'"'^^^^Shanti Bai who had originally filed a suit but had died during ths pendency of the same. In the order impugned dated 07.07.2003 the name of Shanti Bai has been mentioned, however as she has expired, the petition is b'eing filed by the legal represeatative Pankaj Kumar Jain.) Versns 1. ;(Def<!s4aMS) '^ 2. Smt.Archna Jain Widow ofLate Shri Manoj Jain aged about 33 years, R/o Sasaholi, Tehsil Tilda, Dist : Raipur- (C.G.5 Palak Tain S/o Late Manoj Jain aged about 9 years, Minor and therefore through the mother and natural guardian Smt.Archna Jain Widow of late Shri Sfanoj Jain R/o Sasaholi, Tefasil Tilda, Dist:Raipur-(C.G.) 3. State ofChliattisgarh.Tl.-/o^4 "li^t Csl/ect-e.V, fe-;)U-y '-£»• R^ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA XI-HC-22 'S^ •StWvW, wStww, Swmy •;;^?!ts' ai BW R-ll* 31SiS% ^l+ftl1^ ^T^ *»t*i?ti a»<<t«»> 3iTi[$T ^rW .......<-^.;..&..^fe^Ajixol 'l-°o' W-""""""""""""'"1""^ 2BT -ati^Sl ?^ft^(/'af?ti ;9-08-2003 Meard Shri P. Diwakar,coi By this petition under Ar the petitioner has challenged t(ie order dated 07-07-2003, passed by the Third Additional DisTrict Judge which the learned Third Additic of the petitioner filed agdinst Civil Judge, Class-I, in Civil 5uit I have heard learned cc order passed by the trial Court4s well as tiie uppe'late Court. The qrdndmother of •t+ declaration and in.iuriction and griindmot-her of The peTiTtone rejected tiie teroporary injunct has beenupheld byjthelgarnsd c^psllcrte court. Learned counsel for the ivsn to 1+ie trial Court To exp ^ipii<?t*ff*t *<t*im *t i^'tdt ^ "^? oqpa^i arti^ ansei for 1+ie petitioner. ticle£!?226/227 of the Constitution of India [ Raipur in Atisc. Civil Appeai No.5/2003 by |ial bistrict Judge haa rejected the appeal 1-heorder dated19-02-2003, passed by the yo.48-A/2002. [unsel for the petitioner and perused the |e petitioner hod filed a Civil Suit for during the pendenc^ of the Sdid suit tbe [• nameJY Smt. Shanti 'Bal dled and The peTitionsr has been substitut^d' in her place. Learned trial Court has on sought by the petitioner and the same petitionef submitted | tiiat if a di ction is ?dite 1+ie hearing of jrtie ciyil suit That wii! meet the ends o- •ice. ~^? &- ^ [tW<aa<t }.\ l'!'ii iEBH 'i ll a;i| XI-HC-22 ^I^fw R;-tt't>gS;?f ^<R^ W&d 'y-' ^vl'WS^ tii*tCTtt(t<-(i«» ^t^3.lCM^>0^-2A\T- 'LnO_S 6 Maving heard tearned coun and circumstan^s of th' amendmant of Civil Procedure expedite the hean'ng of •tiie ci' possible. With this observation ths Consequently, AA.W.P.No.2 dlsposed of. , ^el for •Hie petitioner, having regard to the ^ case and having regard to the iatest C<^de, it is sxpsctsd thttt the trial Court will ^il suit and decide the same as early as |etition stands disposed of. ^25/2003 and I.A.No.2430/2003 stand ^ . SdA. .. :!~" (qFf *f^Ktf ^ %1 •S '?s'^Ns^8 L.C. Bhadoo Judge ^o^