l..^l; -'..V IN THE fflGH COURT OF CHHATTISHGARH JUDICATURE ATBILA8PUR M.C.C. ^/ 2004 PETITIONER/ DEFENDENT N0.1 -—"- Smt. Lily Kujur , child Suspended & woman ^\^>< ^w> .^^" ^^' Sypervisor .^° ^"^development pennanent Address - r^^^ Vmage Girang P.0 - Gholeag, Tah. & ^y Distt. - Jashpur, Office Address Chief Executive officer , Janpad Pmichayat office Bagicha, P.0. Bagicha , Distt. - Jashpur. VERSUS RESPONDENTNO.l/ PLAINTIFF ^ RESPONDENT N0.2/ DEFENDENT N0.2 -— RESPONDENTN0.3/ DEFENDENT N0.3 - MunkuRam Sarthis/o Late S.R. Sarthi, aged about 57 years ,0ccu. - Service at Present Collector Jashpur, Permatieat address — Village Jatn and Chakradhar Nagar Raigarh, Tah <fe Distt.- Raigm-h (C.G.). Anil Rateriya S/o Shyam Sundar Rateriya , Aged about 42 years , Occu.- Reporter ofDainik Bhaskar , Resi. Of Oaurishanl<ar Road Raigarh (C.G.) Sudhir Agarwal S/o Unknown , Publisher & Copy right through Bhaskar Printing Press , Gumbhar Complex in froat of High Coiirt , Bilaspw (C.G.) —.:^^:'^^.----'"- •^ ^) RESPONDENT N0.4/ DEFENDENTN0.4 ^ Pran Chadda S/o Uolmown ,Editor ofDainik Bhaskar Bilaspur Branch, m fi-ont ofHigh Court, Bilaspur ^^" PETITION FOR TRANSFER OF THE SUIT U/S 24(1} 5 OF C.P.C. fa mt XI-HC-22 TG? r<4t^lld^ ^TiiwjKo, f^<>li<iy 3TI^T'^T 1^IW37l|ST 5ti^iicti <Mi^a L.,,'^^ 't Hl*l<>fll 5b^icb sn^r xra^/ ^M£:L..G/.^.^200 •^^t' 311^1'^RnW^ft^ counbe! 6.8.2004 Srnt- Hamida Siddique, Shri B.b. fiur'u, coun£€;ifor both the counsel. L@arn©d coun^eJ for re^pj objection if fne suit is transf I have perused +he comme^ and ths pi^+rict Judga, ftaigarh. DIsTrict Judge, Jashpur reveais tran^ferred by the Distri commenfs sent by the Distnct ^ been rTientJcned anythlng as to Jaghpur wh©n particulariy in pa^ mentioned ThaT The cause of of the plaint <e^\n<.^ in this p^ mentioned that cau^e of action aj District Judge, Rdgarh ought Ja^hpur €kS th^ cau^©of action Jashpur District. ->^-. Th^rc.fore, the peru^al of^ Judg^ Raigarh, and that of th^ transferred from Raigarh to wfr|y ar|a actl^n 4>l^id<lflr1 ^i^Krff ^ l^zt iPn^K i73Tp<TH3TI^T for thc applicant, respondent No.l (plaintiff)- ?ndent No.l ^ubmit^ that he ha^ ^ ^rred back to Rdgarh. (^ ^ts sent by the bistrict Judge, Jashpur4 Peru^ai of th©commen+^ ^Bnt by th^ |thaT The sdd sult (C.5.No.l.3-B/2002) i^t Judae, Raiaarh. Perusa! of ti^e Fudge, Raigarh, reveais that it has not the civil suit was transferred to 20 of th©ptaint it wa^ sp@cificaily at Raigarh. Perusal of 2b ^titlon reyeal^ that it wa^ ^pecifJcaIly ^ose at ftaigarh, 1+ierefore/the lear /^ |ot to have transferred This suit to had not an^n in th©Jupisdictjon of the comment^ ^ent by the bjstrict piaint shows .that th^ ^aid jsuit wqs fashpur under erroneous Impression. XI-HC-22 ^TI^T^T f^ri^7a?n^T $r>^ICft <^f^q L ^», v , ^Sf ^\^W<^ 9'^W\^ faCT^y ^W^ll 5bN|cb 3H^T XRra? _J^.<.:./^/.0..^.........^ 200 •I^^T' 3TT^T ^IT^R ^rf^T L Moreover, .for"responder| sent to ftaigarh, A^ ^uch/.t| No.l3-B/2002 now registered &istrict Ju-dge, Jashpur Is hereb' chl^d41r1 'RTR^ff"? 'f^zt <rsi<^l< ^^Tf^mw^T t No.l. has no If thesuit'ls ie petltion i^ albwed, Original ciyl! suit |s C.S.No.2-6/2003 in the Court of I/ transferred to ?he Court of DlsTrlct Judge/&aigarh for further proce^dings and dispo^ai. vac-ated. Parti^^ ar^ enti+kd for c^H ,by- this Court on Z6.3.2004 shail stand if?^d copy of thi^ ord^r'. Sd/- L.C.BHADOO Judge