@ IN THE HIGH COURI‘ OF CHHA’I‘TISGARH : BILASPUR Writ Peu'tion No. 3033 of 2006 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (SB: Hon’blc Shli Satish K. Agnihotn‘ J.) 1 Shn' Malay Kumar Bhaduri, Advocatc for the pe‘in'oner. O R D E R (Passed on this 4th Day of December, 2008) The petiu'oner, by this petition, is impumng the order dated 4.3.2006 passed by the Addiu'onal District Judge (FTC), Pendm Road, Dismct— Bilaspur, in’Misc. Civil Appeal. No. 1/ 2003, whereby the rejecu'on of the interim xelief we cider ‘ dated 22.2.2003, passed by the Civil Judge Class-II, Pendra ’ Van Road, in Civil Suit No. 7-A/ 2003, has been upheld. 2. Neither'the prayer for giant of interim relief was made nor any steps have been taken for such a long period for hearing the matter, when the application of the petitioner for _g t of interim injunction was rejected by the trial Court in pending suit on 22.2.2003. Even otherwise, both the courts below after having censidered the case at length have come to the conclusion that there is no balance of convenience in mvour of the pen’tioner. Petiu‘oner/ Smt. Naz Akhtar, aged 45‘ yeaxs, Wd/o Plaintw‘ Abdul Rashid, Residcnt of Pendra, Tahsil 'Pendra Road, District Bilaspur (C.G.) Versus « Raspondcnts/ 1. Sifamm, S/o late Banshi Ram, aged 68 Defendants years. 2. Laxmi Bai, W/o Sifaram, aged 60 yeaxs N Both are resident of Bhatapara, Tahsil Bhatapara, Disuict Raipur (C.G.) 3. It is well—nigh established that this Court in exercise of its supewisoxy jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India should rem itself mm interfen'ng with the oxder passed by the Courts below, except in such cases Where perversity, illegality, irregularity or jun'sdictional ermr is W11't large on the face of the record, whirh is not in the present 0&36. 4. In view of the foregoing, there is no merit in this pdition and the same is dismissed at motion stage. Sd/— Satish K. Agnihotri Judge