•-<' ^^^L- ,.."- :?.rfe* '-' ^^^^^x^-- p,esenteAC'f a^\^s^""" (..•"**" daie'S- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR ^6 WRIT PETITION N0./ /2006 PETITIONER 0< ^ ^ ^ t*' ./*' RESPOND^NTS RESPOND^NT '/J^ '•^^^p^ ^"-"^, ^7' ^^ ^ Chhatradhari Singh, Caste - Gond, aged about 55 years, S/o Brij Lal Singh Gond, Occupation - Agriculturist, R/o Vmage - Rapa, Post Office Khamrod, Tahsil - Bharatpur, District- Koria, (C.G.) VERSUS / 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary General Administration Department, Manfa-alya, D.K.S Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) / 2. The Collector, District - Koria, (C.G.) /3. Zilla Sahkari Krishi Aur Gramin Vikas Bank Maryadit, Through its Chairman, Ambikapur, District - Surguja, (C.G.) /4. The Branch Manager, Zilla Sahkari Krishi Aur Gramin Vikas Bank Maryadit, Branch - Janakpur, Dista-ict - Koria, (C.G.) i!v ^' 5. StationHouse Officer, PoUce Station - Kotadol, District - Koria, (C.G.) / 6. Gulab Gond, S/o Chhotte Lal Gond, aged about 35 years, R/o ViUage - Joili, Tahsil - Bharatpur, District - Koria, (C.G.) / WRIT UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF CONSTITUTION QF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A SUITABLE WRIT. QRDERS AND DIRECTION -1- HISH COURT OF CHHATnseARHATBILASPUR S.B. : Hon^bie Shri JystieeSatishJC^AgrMlwrtFi WKSX PETTTION (C.5 N0. 4645 OF 2006 ^ Petitioner Respondents versus Oihatradhari Singh State of Chhatt'isgarh and others -^^ "^- Present : Mr.Indrasen 5ahu, counsel for the petitiorier. Mr. Sanjay. S. Agrawal, ©overnmentAdvocate for the reSDoncfents No. 1 & 2. OR&ER (Passed on 29th of August, 2006) 1. In the present petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the req3ondent to hand over the vehicle bearing No. C©- 16A/0221. The petitioner purchased a Tractor on Soan, advanced by the respondent No. 4. According to the petitioner, the instalments have regularly been paid to the respondent No. 4 by tiie petitioner. In spite of that the Tractor in dispute has been taken over forcibly by the respondent No. 4 and handed over to the respondent No. 6. -2- Subhash <y 2. The present petition involves disputed question of facts and the petitioner has failed to make out a case that as to what legal/statuary or any other right has been infringed. Since the petition invoives disputed question of facts, this Court can not entertain the same under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Thus, the petition is dismissed with libert/ to the petitioner to' take appropriate proceedings, if so advised. No order as to costs. s<v- . ,, SattehK.Ag»ibom judge '^^^^SSS^SS,