.<»»*' ^^s^- uA ""' -..•••"" ^^di""' ?s;'?'"l ^" •'^T i'f-<l^ WWiLt. i.'f'.'utS IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WP No. T^ / 2006 \f/ PETITION UNDERArt. 227 OF THE CONSTITUTIQN Petitioner as-Pc.""^ G\-^' i\t o ,"z, ipondent ^^({ (i-t;-.d"i'.r;i / Ishwar (mentioned as Ishwari} Prasad Verraa S/o Late Deonath Kurmi, Aged About ^>^, Yrs. Vill. Akoli (Mandhar), Teh. & Distt. Raipur Presently R/o Dev Smriti, Shukla Colony, Raipur VERSUS ^ 1. Udai Bhanu S/o Bhuneshwar Kurmi Age 79 Yrs., R/o DurgTeh. 6s Distt. Durg c 2. Rewaram Aged About 52 Yrs. - 3. Vishnu Prasad Aged About 50 Yrs. 2 & 3 are S/o Late Deonath Kurmi 4. Bhushanlal Aged About 52 Yrs. 5. Ganesh Kumar Aged About 41 Yrs. 6. Sohrab Aged About 38 Yrs. 4 to 6 are S/o Parmanand Kurmi 7. Kapur Chand S/o Devlal Kurmi Aged 77 Yrs. 2 to 7 are _J?/o Vill. Akoli IMandhar), Teh. & Distt. Raipur Assailing Order Dated 05/12/01 in CS No. 227/04 of the Court ofIIADDL. CJ Class - II, Raipur. -^ j^ ^ V? ft ^ "'^ ^' 'r'ay «•.-a- 1<^ •\ .^ ^f^ .\0 \ .\ ^ ,0 .^: .../ ^^ ^ 8. Gangabiii, wd./o Maksudan, r/o Vill. Akoli (Near Mandhar) Teh. €/Distt. Rmpur 9. Jugal Kishore @ Niirottam, S/o Mnksudan, r/o Vill. Akoli (Near M.andhar) Teh. & Distt. Raipur 10. Sushil, S/o Maksudan, r/o Vill. Akoli (Near Mandhar) Teh. & Distt. Raipur ll.Nanhelal, S/o Maksudan, r/o Vill. Akoli (Near Mandhar) Teh. Sf Distt. Raipur 12.Gangadhar, S/o Maksudan, r/o Vill. Akoli (Near Mandhar) Teh. & Distt. Raipur 13.1ndra, d/o M.ciksudan, r/o vill. Tor, Teh. & Distt. Raipur 14-Benbati S/o Maksudan r/o Vill. Kachna, Teh. & Distt. Raipur IB.Ashwmi, S/o Maksudan, r/o Vill. Akoli (Near Mandhw) Teh. & Distt. 'Ruipur _ ._—- fflGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR S.B: Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kuma'rMishra Writ Petition No. PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Ishwar (mentioned as Ishwari) Prasad Verma Versus Udai Bhanu and others Appearance: Shri Raja Sharma, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Manoj Paranjpe, counsel fbr respondents No.4, 5 and 6. None for others respondents. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTFTUTION OF INDIA ORAL ORDER (11.02.2011) In a suit fded sometimes in the year May 1972, the plaintiffs prayer for amendmeat in the plaint to seek relief for delivery of possession with respect to some additional khasra nos./lands has been allowedAythe leamed Trial Court. (2) Leamed counsel for the petitioner would submit that allowins the amendment at such a belated stage in the suit is itself illegal and that the Trial Court has committed material irregularits' while allowing the amendment. (3) Leamed counsel for the respondpnts No. 4, 5 and 6 submits that he is co-defendant in the suit. (4) On perusal of the documents annexed with the writ petition it would appear tliat tlie plaintiff has amended the relief clause in the ^^—'•'"'^ ^, ,-8. suit. The dispute pertains to claim over the laads by tw'o separate wings oflegal representatives ofthe erstwhile holders ofland. (5) While allovving the prayer for amendment the Trial Court has also granted opportuaity to the petitioner to make consequeatial amendment. (6) The impugned order does not sufFer from any error of jurisdiction and no interference is warranted in exercise of powers uader Article 227 of the Constitutioa of India. At this stage leamed counsel for the petitioner would submit that time barred claim has been allowed to be made, while allowing the amendment. It will be open for the petitioner, if he so desires, to raise the plea that the prayer for seeking recovery of possession of newly added khasra nos./lands is barred by limitation. Such plea can be raised in his consequential amendmeiit which has already been pemiitted by the Trial Court. (7) With this obsen'ation, the instant petition stands disposed of. Sdf- prashant Kumar SVIishra ^iudge '•^w-*-