BEFQRE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) tM.^,_ a—~» ^ogIeCeBcff Writ Petition 227 No. /2009. ^etitioner/PIaintiff:- ^r^ td Faisal AIiS^ late Shri Abrar Ali aged about 33 years R/o Neharu Nagar (Gandhi Nagar) Ward No.4, Kasturba Nagar Bilaspur P.S.CiviI Lines Bilaspur Tahsil & District Bilaspur(C.G.) VERSUS ?espondents/Defendants :-J-ir Golu Masih aged about 21 years S/oShri Dadu Masih; ^ h^y^ ^^u^i^ 4:S^P ^p- 2. Smt.Marium Masih W/o late Vijay Kumar masih aged about 61 years ; ^Dadu MasihS/o Vijay Kumar Masih aged about 41 years; A11M-3 R/o • Neharu Nagar (Gandhi Nagar ) Ward N6.4, Kasturba Nagar Bilaspur P.S.Civil Lines Bilaspur Tahsil & District Bilaspur (C.G.) •^.State Of Chhattisgarh, Through itsCoIlector Bitaspur (C.G.) ^^" ':: WRIT PETmON UNDERARTICLE227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FORJTHE ISSUANCE OF THE APPROPRIATE WMTAVRITSAND/ORDIRECTION/DIRECTION TB MAY IT BE PLEASED YOU HONOUR t^, ^•^S^^^ffK's^-^""- ^s HIGHCefURT^CI-IHAI'TISGARI-lATBII-ASPUR SinaleBenGhi: Hon'bleShri.JusticePrashantKumafeMishra Writ Petitioii(227) No.56766f 2009 getjtioner Saiyad Faisal Ali versus ResDOndents GoluMasihand others Present: : , :''. .' , ' ' ' : :. Shri SureshPandey, counselfbrtjiepetitioner. SliriSanjeevAgrawat, Panel LawyerfortheState/regpondentNo^t. WritPetitionuhderArticle227oftheGoristitutionoflndia ORAL ORDER ^ Heard on admission. 2. The trial Court tias alloweGJ responclents/defendants1 applieation under Qrder 9 Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (henceforth 'fhe C^de') and has set asjde the ex parte prder passedagainstthernon 17-12-2008. 3. The defendahts are followers of Christian faith. The reason assigned fornot attending tbe Court: on the date when the trial was fixed that the defendants had gpne to Baitalpur during festival and when they came back, oh 3-1-2009 theybecame aware about the ex parfe order. Th&trial Court, having recordeci its satisfaction abouf the explanatioh put-forth bythedefendants fortheirabsence in the hearing on 17-12-2008, hasSetasidetheexjDariB order. satisfaction reached bythetrial appearto'beperverse.ltis -settled lawthat interferenceunderArtiGle 227 ofthe Gonstitution of 4. lntheopinionofthisCoyrt,the Court cannotbeexannineclasitdoesnot -^_TT?yft *t*^N Gopal India is to be made in rare cases and sparingly wtlere non- interference would Qccasion failure of justice. The present is hot a case where any such contingency arises. This Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petitioh, which fails andis hereby dismissed. Sd//- prashantKumar T" Judge Mishra ^s