INZHEHIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION U/A 227 No?.-^.T'.>../2009 35^ ^nab ^' PETITIONER: - DEFFENDENT Nagar Panchayat Takhatpur, Through: ChiefExecutive OfGcer, Nagar Panchayat Takhatpur, Thasil - Takhatpur, Disrict:- Bilaspur. (C.G.) VERSUS REPONDENTS: - PLAINTIFF .' Smt. Pooja Agarwal Aged about 27, W/o Prahlad Agarwal, R/o :- Ward no: - 2 Belpan Road, Takhatpur, Thasil - TaKhatpur, Disrict:- Bilaspur. (C.G.) Smt. Fool bai Agarwal, w/o Shriram Bilas Agarwal, d/o Biharilal agarwal, R/o Takhatpur, Thasil - Takhatpur, Disrict:- Bilaspur. (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF DMDIA ^ "S-^ ^W<^i, -^WS, ^IWp: )t^5-•^ 2009 SR^T-®f',i(Nri p-)i3?j*?i%tTi3r! ;ate for the petitioner. applications for takins record. The appiications are ^llowed and the documents therewith are taken on record. I rsents on annexed Heard on admission. The instant petition i^ directed against the order dated 08.07.2009, passed by the Adilitional District Judge, Bilaspur, in civi appeal No. 01/09, whereby andjwhereunder the Misc. Appeal preferred by the petitioner against t'ne orper of injunction passed by Civil Judge Class li in civii suit No. 55-A/09,|has been dismissed. The brier' facts of the ca^e are that, the respondent instituted civil suit for declaration of injun^tion against the petitioner and also flied an application for temporary injunction under Order 39 Ruie 1 & 2 of As per respondent's cas^, the respondent are owner of the suit bearing Khasra No. 187Ar^a 16295 Sq.f. on which one Rice Mili is 1 also constructed but the petitiotter is trying to construct shops over the suit iand, therefore prays for grpnt of temporary' injunction. In reply to application filed by the respond^nt, the petitioner herein stated that the 1 iand bearin.q Khasra No. 151/1 jhas been aiiotted to them bv the State ^[RT^r? s-^pr H5:~m^ "t Idq, »^fiyil<c, W Govemment and they are auctidning the said land not t'ne land bearing KhasraNo. 187. i The trial court, on due| appreciatlon of the pleadings of the parties and material p!aced onjrecord, passed the injunction order in favour of respondent restraining the petitloner to construct shops over the suit iand bearing Khasra Noj. 187. T'ne said order was affirmed by t'ne sppeliate court. j A bare perusal of orders ipassed by both the courts below would reveai that the petitioner is in riossession of suit land bearlng Khasre No. 151/1, the petitioner has no( been restrained to construct the shop over the land bearing Khasra i^o. 151/1, but has been restrained for construction overthe land bearinjg Khasra No. 187, and therefore, in the opinion ofthis court, no infirmitylor illegaiity has been committed by the courts below in passing the ordej-s impugned. It is weli settled prJnciplej of law that this Court, in exereise of its supervisory jurisdiction uncj er Articie 227 of the Constitution of india, should refrain itself frorrl interfering with the order passed by 1 ~ '"' ~ ~ ~ " '" ""- ~ " " ' the Court below, except in su^h cases where perversity, iilegality, irregularity or jurisdictional erl'or is writ iarge on the face of the record, which is not in the pre^ent case. 1 'he petition is meritless! The same desen/es to be and is accordingly dismissed. No orderlasto costs. i Sd/- j N.K. Agarwal -i— Judge ^NH^rH^i:a^rt^T^—FS/95—11/2008—l.,CO,000.