IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR mp. No. CM‘ [2001 Ashutosh Prajapati, #7:. S/o. /3 75 .Late Pravin Prajapati, Mfnor Thrcugh his mother mt. H ati Prajapati, w/oa late Pravin Pr japati. Shailendra Prajapati, S/s. Late Jatan Ram Prajapaii. aged about 28 yrs., v Both a/o. Manipur. ps. s; Teh. Ambikapur, Distta Sarguja. Chh. Pm IT IONERS REDEI‘S SPQNN Ram Nandan s/o. Nadhiya. aged about 55 years Pita S/o. Nadhiya, resident of Panchfedi. Ambikapur. 3. Dec Lal. S/o. Bagar Uraon. aged about 35 years, 4. Samay Lal, S/a. Bagar Uraon, aged about 3g years. Kanhaya. s/o. Bagar Uraon, aged about 39 years, / Hima Bai. Widow of Kailash. aged about 30 years. Ku. sumen. D/o. Kailash, aged 6 years. Minor through her mother Hima Bai, A11 a/a. village Manipur, ps. & Teh. Ambikapur. Distt. Sarguja.Ch The state of‘M.P. Through collec- tor. Sarguja, Ambikapur. X. The Additional Civil Judge C1aSs-I Ambikapur. Distt. Sarguja.chh., in the capacit of Lok Adalato y PEPITION UHDER WICLE 226 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION A. 0.0020 . h g i 3% E WE i333? ‘W.P. No. 94/2001 3a «mama wci‘mrg, Em. \ It is pointed out b‘ y Mr. Sunil Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners that r ‘became functus-officio. 1 it is submitted that dire the decree be drawn i‘n te This is the only prayer m ade inthis petition. ited prayer, I am of the opinion that I need not grant further time to Mr. Gautam Bhadhuri.” learned PL for State for :mhlajy‘ and Mr. Gautam Bhadhuri, While ,Civil Suit was as the parties were willi'hg to compromise -‘- the suit, the matter wasib Class-II, Ambikapur, hearing the parties, it w terms of comprqnise were able to the terms. In Vi at, > it was furth dismissed. a rrived in View of the lim 3; lea ned PL for the State. pending before Iilrd Civil>Judge, _ .t ,-) rought before the L91: Ada1at. After as recorded by Lo): Adalat that the read out and the parties were agree- ew ot’ the amicable settlement, thu er ordered that the suit Mmld Sta: the Court z :nce the suit was decided, / rlowever, as decree needs to be draww :tiod be issued by this Court that;l~~ ms of the compromise settlement. ‘1‘ certain interpretation of obtaining instructions or to clarify law as suggested by him. n? We tfaa EWTEwg; frma Wii 200 ma“ iqfr% wm W131 mawaféa WWWIHWW gh— m m “ 2y2/2oo1 ‘ ' Heard Mr. Sunil sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners \24 i 1n the result, this§petition is disposed‘of with the direction that the Cburt aforesaid sh§ll now draw the decree in terms of the settlement incorporated in the order dated 20/12/1997 (Annexure A/4) of the Lok Adalat. Certified copy be given on usual charges. i i € ‘ ‘ 1 \ Sdl— Chief Justice ,i r r reh ee i e _m, '$ f r mmwai‘gaw)’ r? I 5 am$w$wumé¥§%w§ %Em €Km%n$@w $§$EEH ' l I" 2