IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COQRT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPILR WRIT PETITION UIA 227 No. _ [/vg"¥x l 2008 PETITIONER/: NON-APPLICANT RESPONDENT: APPLICANT Inderchand , S/o Ratan Bafna, Aged abOut 55 years, R/o Nandai Chowk, Rajnandgaon, VERSUS Present Address Village Paloud Parri Dewari, District Durg, C.G. Gyanchand S/o Ratan Bafna Aged abaut 52Years, R/o Nandai Shahar , WRIT pEITION T CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. Tehsii & District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) UNDER ARTICLE 227 ' OF THE , @ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Single Bench: Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Writ Petition (227) No.4578 of 2008 Petitioner lnderchand verSUS Respondent Gyanchand Present: Shri J.K.Gupta, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rakesh Anthony, counsel for the respondent. Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of india ORAL ORDER (Passed on 15m February, 201 1 ) Heard. 2. On an appiication filed by the respondent for mutation of his name in the revenue record pertaining to a house situated at Piot No.3, Sheet No.5OC, Mohaiia Nandai, Tahsii and District Rajnandgaon, proceedings were initiated, however, the appiication ~»‘i‘ was rejected by the Assistant Superintendent of Land Records (Nazui). Appeal preferred before the Sub«Divisional Officer as well as the second appeal preferred before the Additional Collector, Rajnandgaon were also rejected. Challenging the said concurrent orders, the respondent preferred a revision before the Board of Revenue, which has allowed the revision and set aside the orders passed by the subordinate revenue Courts. 3. On perusal of the impugned order as well as the averments V made in/the writ‘petition, it would appear that the parties have /\\ @ seriously joined issues on the question of partition of the subject house at the time when other agriculturai properties were partitioned. Dispute is also with regard to payment of Rs.3 Lakhs, as, according to the respondent, he has paid Rs.3 Lakhs to the petitioner in lieu of ailotment of the house in his share, however, the petitioner submits that he has not received the amount of Rs’.3 Lakhs. 4. in View of the above, disputedquestions of fact cannot be gone into in this writ petition nor the revenue Court, in view of dispute of complicated nature involving execution of document and its proof etc., could have passed an order for mutation. The revenue Court should have directed the parties to approach civil Court for establishment of their respective right and entitlement. 5. in view of the above, parties to this writ petition are directed to approach civil Court for establishment of their title by preferring a duly constituted civil suit before the jurisdictional civil Court. To enable the parties to make prayer for grant of appropriate interim relief/temporary injunction, it is directed that status quo in all respects with regard to the subject property shall be maintained by both the parties for a period of three months from today. 6. The writ petition is disposed of in above terms. Sdl- Gopal Prashant Kumar Misttta i», Judge _ i