IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT B!U^lPURlC^ ^^ BENCH W8IT^E?ntlON {227} N0. ^ S> 6 "^ /2009 PETITIONER D<2^e^vd^Ajf— Smt. Rita Sharma W/o Sri Deepak Shanna A^d-abBut 24 years, ^/o Surana Bhawan, Ganj^ara, DiM]g Distt.- Durg [C.G.] VERSUS RESPONDENT PAc^n-^'W ..-•^^ \^^y ^.''•" ...<• ^y ^^ ^•^ <'"' y^ ^•^' Harsh Parekh S/o Sri Fakir Chand Parekh, Aged-about 41 years, R/o Housing Board Padmanabhpur, Durg, Distt.- Durg [C.G;] o^- ft^ WRIT PETITION UNDERARTICLE 227 GF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT. ORDER OR DIRECTIONS The above named petitioners most humbly and ^espectfully begs to submit as under: -HC—78 3T?^T ^T'f^fNr 1cT^?T ^ff^T^RNT '^ ^ww^ yhw«h 'TSET '<ii^i<n-4, ^til-M^iG, f®i<'ii'y^< ^<T.-n)Hc)<^o^7/0^ W^ 200 UJ ^T^T'1?^)' (^f^^^?) ^^TW^rfi^f 3?T?^T SB: HON. SHRI JUSTICB CivU Suit No. 7A/2009 I^T ^i^<ni ^* fe^ <f^<^« ^^tRmsn^r IN.K. AGARWAL 3-8-2009 Shri Sanjay Patel, A^vocate, for the petitioner. Heard on admission.l Instant petition is dtt'ected against the order dated 13-7- 2009 passed by VIIIth Add|tional Distdct Judge (FTC), Durg in whereby and whereunder, the application filed by the |petitioner under Section 65 of the Indian Evldence Act has ^een dismissed on fhe ground tfaat the same is not filed bona^dely. Shri Sanjay Patel, \.eamed counsel for the petitioner, would submit that as fhe <t>rigmal is lost and is not traced out, therefore, they have lodg^d report before fhe police station and thereafter flled fhe afe)plication under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act for se^ondaiy evidence. I have gone careful|y fhrough the record as also tihie impugned order. \- v -.^.^:^':-: -. ^ "";i:^ •// l'% '^. '%.x ^^ !::>^5^-HG-78 3TT^T ^T Ri'lJch ^f2H 3TT^T $h^ich + ^.e- ^1*ICTI (h*11«st» T^r ^iqi<n^ ^til^^Ko, [®i<ni^^< ^?c^i)Nt>^6"/Q3 •^200 3TI^?T^^! ( y(^<i?) IF^TTW ^f^T 3T?^T The triial Court ha(s after discusstng fhe reasons fhe appMcation preferred by the tnissed fhe same. fh^it elaborately and holding petition is not bonafide, dis In view of the above, I counsel for the petitioner 1] or jurisdictional error lead}ng the impugned order petitioner so as to invoke Court under Article 227 of1 The petition fails and Ghl<lf<n<fll 'RW^f ^ fs^l <r»l^l< ^i'3TfiW3n^T 1 am of fhe opinion that the leamed (as failed to point out any illegaBty comE|iitted by fhe trial Court m passing to manifest injustice to the extraordinary jiirisdiction of this the Constitution oftodia. ^s dismissed at admission stage. Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge I