DEFENDANTS RESPONDENTS PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANT COURT OF CHHATTISGH AT BJLASPUR (Hon. Mr. J'ystice Pritinker Diwaker) PETfTiON (227) No. 1700 of 2009 1. 2. 3. 5. 6. VERSUS 1. 2. 3. 4. s. 6. 7. Shaibhuram, S/o Ramkumar Sahu, aged about 30 years, Satanand, S/o Ramkumar Sahu, aged about 26 years, Lacchan, S/o Ramkumar Sahu, aged about19years, Dujbai, D/o Ramkumar Sahu, aged about 22 years, Smt. Bimlabai, Wd/o Ramkumar Sahu, aged about49 years, Ramchand, S/o Sukal Sahu, aged about 55years, AII R/o Viilage Heerapur, Tahsil Balod, Distriet Durg (C.G.) Ramadhar, S/o Sukla! Sahu, aged about 65 years, Rambai, Wd/o Ramgulai, aged about 53 years, Yuvtibai, D/o Ramgulal (Wo Ageshwar Sahu) aged about 36 years, R/o Village Jangleshwaer, Tahsil and District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Kaiabai, D/o Ramgulal Sahu, aged about 34 years, Rajesh, S/o Ramgufal Sahu, aged about 32years, * Harish Kumar, S/o Ramgufal Sahu, aged about 30 years, Respondents No. 1,2, 4to 6 are R/o Village Heerapur, Tahsil Balod, District Durg(C.G.) Stete of Chhattisgarh, Through : the Collector,Durg,DistrictDurg (C.G.j ':';^^sS:Me::-^;3^;N^ .i;^.^^^'^'^- ^^-i^S;: ^ ^^^s^..-^^^::^S^^^^-^-^^^ ^ Mr. P.P. Sahu, counsel for the petitioners. Mr. Pankaj Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer for respondent No.7 PETITIQN UNDERARTICLE 227 OFTHE CONSTTTUJION OF ORDER (2.4.2009) The chatlenge in the present petttion is to the order dated 19.02.2009 (Annexure P-1) passed by Civil Judge, Class II Balod whereby the application filed by the respondents/plaintiffe under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC has been allowed. 2) The contention of the counsel for the petitioners is that the applicatiori filed by the respondents/plaintifls ought not to have been aitowed by the court beiow for the reason that by doing this the plaintiffsw^nt to get the entries made eariier during the survey settlement, corrected. Another contention of the petitioners is that the Civn Suit is barred by the provisions of Section 257 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code. 3) After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the documents avaiiable on record, 1 amof the view that no prejudlce would be caused to the petitioners even . if report of the Gommissioner is calied because the petitioners witl have suffi.cient opportunity to challenge the said report and to lead the evidence accordingly. The contention ofthe petitioners that in view'of the provisions of Section 257 of ths Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, the suit cannot be tried,cannot be accepted. The relief sought for by the plaintiffe can be considered by the Civil Court and, therefore, it cannot be said that the Civil Suit is barred by the provisions ofSection 257of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code. Moreover, scope of Article 227 of the Constitution ^•fsaStssrws^,•^^^i'^i,^^W3^!S'^-'^^^^jf5H -3- of India cannot be stretched to the extent of interfering with the case iike the presentone. Therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. However, the petitioners woyld be at liberty to raise ali fhese points at the appropriate stage. -Ci- .jyo Sd/- Pritinker Diwakar Judge K