- '-i 's'-S ii ^ i (1) -3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF 3UDICATURE CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (C) No.y^ 707 PETmONERS l... /"2< ---*•- /w. .^y Wn^ ^>^/ "wy /^' ^y ^- (>" Nishith Kumar Choubey S/o Shri Dashrath Lal Choubey aged about 56 years. Sandhya Kumari d/o Shri Dashrath Lal Choubey, aged about 35 years, Smt. Ramabai W/o ShriDashrath Lal Choubey, aged about 75 years, petitioner no. 2 & 3 through their General power of attorny holder NIshith Kumar Choubey. All are R/o. Bajrangpur, Nawagaon Town, Tah. and Distt. Rajnandgaon. (C.G.) ^iLf^i^ •«^(. ^ i/to/y_ VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1. ^ Vijay Laxmi W/o Narayan Prasad Tiwari, aged about 65 years, R/o Bajrangpur, Nawagaon Town, Tah, and Distt. Rajnandgaon. (C.G.) Kamla Sharma W/o. Radheyshyam Sharma, . aged about 63 years, R/o Brahman Para, Town, Tah. & Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Collector, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 7^1337 OF ^" THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PETITIONERS: HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARhLBILA^PUR Writ Petition (Cl No.3639 of 2007 1. Nishith Kumar Choubey 2. Sandhya Kumari 3. Smt. Ramabai (Died and deleted) RESPONDENTS: Versus 1. Vijay Laxmi 2. Kamla Sharma 3. State of Chhattisgarh {Writ petition underArticle 227 ofthe Constitution of India} Present: Mr. V.K. Sharma, counsel forthe petitioners. Mr. Vinod KumarTekam, Panel Lawyerforthe State/respondent No.3. Sincile Bench: Hon'ble Mr. T.P. Sharma, J ORDER (1-10-2012) 1. I.A.Nos.1, 2 & 3 for taking documents on record are allowed. Documents are taken on record. 2. By this petition, the petitioners have challenged legality and propriety of the orders dated 24-7-2003 & 13-1-2004 passed by the 2nd Civil Judge Class-ll, Rajnandgaon in Civil Suit N0.18A/2003, the order dated 20-9-2005 passed by the 1 Additional District Judge, Rajnandgaon in Misc. Civil Appeal No.5/2004 and the order dated 4-5-2005 passed by the Board of Revenue, Bilaspur (Circuit Court, Raipur) in Revenue Case N0.24/A-12/2003-04. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the orders impugned and copies of other documents. 4. By aforesaid orders, the civil court has dismissed the application for grant of temporary injunction which has been affirmed by the appellate Court. The petitioners have filed this petition on 6-2-2007 and no interim order or direction has granted. During the pendency of this petition, petitioner No.3 Ramabai died and application for deleting her name has been filed as I.A.No.4. After nine years of first order passed by the civil court and seven years 6f the order passed by the appellate Court, I do not find any propriety in the present writ petition. I.A.No.4 for deleting the name of petitioner No.3 is al'owed and necessary deletion be made during the course of the day in the Court itself. The petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs;—---—----- Sd/- T.P. Shanna Judge n^^^^^l???±^^ii(^^^SBUWatGieteSS!flfc tt&<eLBriSBaE**E