"i' c: ^ '^ L^ IN THE HIGHCOURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARH) WRIT PETITION^rNO.~?:£j' /2009 PETJTIONER 3>Z\<^cAa-Ar- ^ RESPONDENTS yV^' ^>-<iT\ ^^ ^'.- .^^y ^w ^y /^''/ <" ^•:- ^ ^ \^^,^^ ""-...;.' 74us^y ^ Cent Bank, Home Finance Limited Through Its Branch Manager, Surya Bhawan, Near Laxmi Talkies, Juna Bilaspur, C.G. VERSUS 1. Surendra Rao Mohite Age about 45 year, S/o Late Shri N.R. Mohite, 2. Smt. Manjusa Mohite, Age - 40 years, W/o Shri Surendra Rao Mohite, Both R/o M.i.G. 10, Sagardeep Enclave, Near Uslapur Railway Crossing, Village - Ameri, Tahsil - Takhapu.r, Distt. Bi!aspur (C.G.) 3. Sudeep Kumar Mukherjee, Age about 51 year, S/o Late Shri Surya Kumar Mukherjee, Head Cashier Bank of Baroda, R/o Near Hemu Cplony Chowk, Raipur Road, Jarhabhata, Tahsil & District - Bilaspur(C.G.) ; 4. Tapash Kumar Mukherjee, Age about 41 year, S/o Late Shri Surya Kumar Mukherjee, Head C.S.E.B. Korba, R/o Near Hemu Colony Chowk, Raipur Road, ^ .^^^•- Jarhabhata, Tahsil & District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 5. Shantanu Choudhary, Age about - 36 year, S/o Shri T.D. Choudhary, R/o Shailendra Nagar, Ameri, Tahsil & District Bilaspur, C.G. 6. Santosh Kumar sahu, Age about- 34 year, S/o Late Shri Mansaram Sahu, Cast - Sahu, Hindu, By Occupation - Coionizer, Developer, Contractor, Promoter R/o Vi!lage & Post - Tifra, Tahsil & District-Bilaspur(C.G.) 7. Smt. Bundi Bai, Age about - 68 year, W/o Late Shri Jogeshwar Yadav, Cast - Yadav, R/o Mungeli Road, Near Ajanta Saw Mil!, Tahsil & District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 8. State of Chhattisgarh Through - Collector, Bilaspur C.G. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA \;., '^- 'v^.;-. f6 HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSQARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (2271 No. 783 of 2009 PETmONER DEFENDANT ; Cent Bank, Home Finance Limited Versus RESPONDENTS : Surendra Rao Mohite and others. PLAINtlFFS WRIT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTrrUTION OF INDIA (Sinale Bench: Hon'bte Shri N.K. Aaarwal. J.l Present : Shri Anand Shukla, counsel for the petltioner. Shri Vinod Tekam, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent No.8. ORALORDER (Passed on 03"1 day of January, 2011) Heard. 2 The instantpetition is directed against the order dated 05-12-2008 passed by VI Additional Distrfet Judge, Bilaspurin Cjvi! Sujt No. 16-A/2008 allowing the respondents'/plalntjffs' appjteation under Order 1, RutelO (2) read with under Order 6, Rute 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the C.P.C.) whereby and whereunder the petitioner's name has been deleted from the cause title of the suit as party defendant. 3. Shri Anand Shukla, leamed counsel for the petjtioner would submit that the plaintiffe were not entitled to fite a suit against the petitioner/Bank. Therefore. with mala-fide intention the petitioner's name has been deleted. Be that as tt may, it is not in dispute that after delefing the petitloner's name, any decree passed in the suit is not binding upon the petitioner and, therefore, the petitjoner's legal right is not going to be affected in any manner from the result ofthe suit. ^- ^ .^ Ai' \^. •-.••— Kvr 4. In view of the above, thepetitioner had no legal rigN to fite this petftion to challenge the order in the sutt. The p^ttjon being devoid of substance is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. No order asto costs. —- Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge