w. % ...^. INTHEHIGHCOURTOFCHHATTISGARHATBItASPUR Civil Reyisl6n_Na.tffO /2005 ^ Applicants 'Palintiffs 1. Ramawatar aged 65 .years son of Bhukhan Kurmi 2^ Ramratan aged 50 years son of Bhukhan / Kurmi Both of them resident of village Mendra Tahsil Takhatpur Disst. Bilaspur (C.G.) •^' Respondents :- 'Defendents .•^' ^ ^ wy / ??^'^ ^"^ <t-" .-^ ^' <y <t'<^ rP^ ^r^ ^0^ c^s^^ VERSUS 1. Smt. Chandan Bai widow of Late Shri Ramfal / Kurmi 2(A). Ashok aged 12 years son of Pardeshi minor through next friend father Pardeshi son of Chumha Kaushik 2(B). Pardeshi son of Chunha Kaushik Both are resident of village Khamhariya , Tahsil Takhatpur Disst. Bilaspur (C.G.) 3. Ramesh Kumar son of Ramfal Kurmi </ ,4. Rajesh Kumar son of Ramfal Kurmi >. Gayatrii Bai daughter of Bhukhan Kurmi y6. Gangotri Bai daughter of Bhukhan Kurmi 7. Smt. GendiBai daughter of Bhukhan Kurmi •vc' 8. Smt. Sumitra Bai daughter of Bhukhan Kurmi 9. Smt. Narmada daughter of Bhukhan Kurmi 10. State of Chhattisgarh through Collector Bilaspur (C.G.) Civil Revision UnderSection 115 ofThe Code Of Civil Procedure. Beina Aaarieved _bv_the order dated 03:02.2005 passed bv theljllrd Civil Judae Class I Bilaspur, in Civil Suit No. 60 A/98' Ramawatar and others versus / Chandan Bai and others vide Annexure A-l. ll*l«lWW y-oq '-oiqirttf, UTti'H^ld, Rdl-(4y<( £:&...1°^ 3ii^?TwR-<i<t> aaiTSII^aipiIPP 3IT^5T iraq; (•^(^d^i) ^200 S^IT8R^lf8CT3II^?T 27/10/2005: - None for the applicants. However, record perused. An apptlcation (I.A. Nc wlthdrawal of the has been The Is 'nKifcxDi ii*inV*l'"fa'^l <(St'«l'( ^sif^tTaii^a M91 lled. i) for .and.tbfi civii. revision_ Is diSiTiisssd ss withdrsvifH. •Sd/- ^s~:~enfefjustice