IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR JC.G.1 WRIT PETITION (227) N0. ^-O 72010 PETITIONERS P^IS-^TT^S ^ \°' ,<^ ^ \^"^a>°"" ^>M-\y ^yy^y^] <^/^^:i^\ sy l5c^fc< S s^' l.Sukhnath S/o Lekhanram Kostha aged-about 42 years, service, R/o village- Kondagaon, post-kondagaon, Distt.- Bastar [C.G.] 2. Shambhunath S/o Lekhanram Kostha aged-about 42 years, service, R/o village- Kondagaon, post- kondagaon, Distt.- Bastar [C.G.] 'S.Lalita Bai Wd/o LeklA-am aged - about 66 yrs. Caste - kostha fdied I ^4.Ratni bai W/o ^oop Singh kostha aged-about 46 yrs r/o village- Jagadalpur Tehsil-Jagadalpur, Distt.-/ Bastar [C.G.] (died] 'r ^•^" RESPONDENTS 3>^F(rn3>/^r^ S.Manki bai W/o Meghnath Kostha aged-about 41 yrs, r/o village- Kondagaon, post-kondagaon, Distt.- Bastar [C.G.] 6.8hanti bai w/oLaxman Kostha aged- about 34 yrs, r/o village- Kondagaon, post-kondagaon, Distt.- Bastar [C.G.] 7.Ku. Kranti bai d/o Lekhanram Kostha aged-about 27 years, farmer, R/o village- Kondagaon, post- kondagaon,Distt.- Bastar [C.G.] S.Anti bai w/o Ganesh Kostha aged- about 24 yrs, r/o village- narayanpur, Distt.- Bastar [C.G.] VERSUS l.Ganeshram ^i/o Ramsingh caste- Kostha, aged-about 50 yrs, teacher education department 2.Mohan singh S/o Mengaleram Kostha, aged-about 43 yrs, farmer 3. Sukmani bai w/o Harilal kostha aged-about 41 years, farmer @ J^ No. 1 to 3 are the r/o village- post Kondagaon, tahsil Kondagaon, Distt.- Bastar[ C.G.] 4.Preinsingh S/o Mangatram Kostha aged-about 38 years, service (State bank Of Jagadalpur) r/o village- jagadalpur, Distt.- Bastar [C.G.] 5.8tate of MP (now Chhattisgarh) Through Collector Bastar place Jagadalpur, Bastar [C.G.] WRIT P^TITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTK)N OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT. ORDER OR DIRECTIONS ^ HIOH COURT OF CHHATTISOARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (2271 N0. 70 OF 2010 . PETITIONERS/ PLAINTIFFS RESPONDBNT8/ DBFENDANTS Sukhnafh and ofhers Versus Ganeshram and others. Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India (Sinele Bench: Hon1»leShri N.K. Aflarwal, J.t Present : Shri Sanjay Patel, counsel for fhe petitioners. Sliri M.V. Paranjpe, coimsel for respondents No. 1 to 4. Shri Vinod Tekam, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORALORDBR (Passed on 15th day ofApril, 2011) Heard. 2. The instaat petition calls in question fhe legality and propriety of fhe order dated 28-06-1997 passed by Civil Judge, Class-H, Kondagaon, Bastar in Civfl Suit No.62- A/1996 whereby the Trial Court after holding, suit is not properly valued and proper Court fees is not padd, directed the petitioners to value fheir suit for relief of pardtion of house m accordance wifh law. 3. Leamed counsel for fhe petitioner could not potat out any Ulegality or uregularity in the order impugned. Undisputedly, plaintiffs have claimed l/3rd share in fhe suit house but did not value it for fhe purpose of Court fee and valuation. .y 4. In view of fhe above, I do not find any substance in fhe petition. The petition is liable to be and is hereby dismissed, However^ fhe petitioners are pennitted to value their suit in accordance with the order impugned. Parties are directed to appear before ftie Trial Court on 20-06- 2011. Sd/- N. K. Agarwal Judge Kvr