HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A, N0.29^009 ApRellant Respondent No.1 Defendant No.1 Respondents Appeiiants Plaintiffs Resppndent Defendant No.2 Respondent Defendant No.3 Sunder Ram, S/o Baisakhu Ram, aged about 30 years, caste Nagesla, Occupation Agricuiture, residence of viltage Lota (Damhatoi!) Tahsi! Bagicha, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. Versus 1. Fulchand, S/o Badka, aged about 40 years, caste H&QQSI& Occupation Agricultare, residence of vilJage Lota (DamhaSo!i) Tahsi! Bagicha, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 2. Rameshwar, S/o Nanakchand, aged about 65 years. caste Agrawal. R/o viSSage Bagicha, Tahsil Bagicha, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. 3. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Collector, Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. (MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(u) OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE ARRISING OUT OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.11,2008 PASSED BY THE DISTRICT JUDGE, JASHPUR. IN CIVtL SUIT N0.6-A/2007) (SB: Hon'bte Mr. T.P. Sharma, J.) Shri CJ.K.Rao, counsel for the appellant. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Dy.Govt.Advocate for the respondent No.S/State. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 23rd March, 2009) Heard on I.A.No.1, apptication for condonatton of delay in filing the appeal as the same has been preferred with a delay of 24 days. On due consideration, the apptteatton (I.A.No.1) is allowed> Delay jn filing the appeal is hereby condoned. Also heard on admission. Learned counsel for the appellant submite that the leamed District Judge, Jashpur has committed an lilegality by remandjng the civil syit for ^•^y - 2- (^^ retrial. Learned counsel further submite that the Court below has directec) for disposal of the suit w'rthin a period of 3 months, but th®Civil Judge Class-11, Jashpur has not decided the civil suit within the said period from the orderdated21.11.2008. I have perused the judgment impugned. After taking into consideration the paras 11,13,16 & 17 ofthe judgment impugned, l am of the view that the Court below has not committed any iltegaljty by remanding the case for retrial in accordance witti law. 1 do not fmd an^ scope for interference in this appeat. Consequentiy, the appeal is djsmissed at the staage of admission. The appellant will bear the cost of this appeal. However, the trial Court is directed to expedit®and decide the cMI suit within a period &f three months from the date of receipt of a copy of thSs order on behalf of ttie appetlant. B/- Sd/- T.P.Sharma Judge