T •^\ ^ ^.-.-. 6LE-BEiCH IN THB OF AT BSLASPUR wnt Petition No. 1$63 / 2005 Petitioner / Plaintiff ^•l% y&y^ ,/:^'^" \^y '^•' Respondent/ Defendant Bodhan Barik S/o Shri Biharilal Barik Aged About 48 Years R/o B-78, Gayatri Nagar, Raipur, Teh. 85 Distt. Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS Aarti Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Through, Director ~ Suresh Atlani S/o Shri Golarani Atlani, Ashoka Towers, Shanker Nagar, Raipur, Teh. 85 Distt. Raipur (C.G.) Assailing Order Dated 7/04/2005 Passed By The Court Of I Additional District Judcie,Raipur, In Misc. Cwil Appeal No. 12/2005 Arising Out Of Order Dated 15/03/05 Passed By The Court Of I Addl. Civil Judae To The Court Ofl Civil Judae - Class-1, Raipur In CS No. 9A / 05. PETITION UNDERART 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION ^at t^e pctition of t^c petitioncr respectfuff^ ${jowctQ as foffow$- wr~^ XI-HC-22 3TT^?T^T f^TT^3T[^T ^iW^f^T 3'^T ^TPH^iZT^ ^T|I<H^<D, ?^^1^^< OT^^T(cra^ ^I^^T^RTBeh^.^.eL^^i^ ^ 200 ^n^T^RffW^HfN' Shii Raia ShaiTiia; couij Shri P. Dnvakar, Sr. Cq fbr tiie respoiident. Tlie petitioner has pref^ tlie Constitution of India que| order clated 7.4,2005 passed Raipiir in M.C.A. No. 12/20^ 15.3,2005 passed bv learaed No.9A/2005 whercby leanied| of petitiouer hereiii filed und^ graiited teinporary iojiuictioii the dcfeudaiit/rcspcsiideut of petitioner dlrecfly .or mdtrc^ I have heaixl leanied col Leai'iied couusel for' t| jiKigiiieiit of Suprerae Court Tsrapaathi Vid (8} Vs. ai-gued tliat tlie appel^ with the order of trial court facie case of tlie petitioner appellate court reaches to gone wroug in recording thc ^ thar. midmg on tlie basis of fli considered the rclevajit ma! reached tlie fliidiiig or con<| <=t)l^?<-l41-l HTRoTf fr* fe^ ^f^F^R ^3Tl^T3TT^T }sel for the petitiouer. (uiisel with Shri A, Maziiuidar, Coiiiiscl ^rrcd this peutioti uucier Arttele 227 of ^tioniB.g tlie legatity aad correctiiess of by leaiiied 1st Additioiial District Jud^e, p5 thercby revcrsiag ihe ordcr dated [Civil Judge Class-I, Ralpm' m Clvil Suit |Civil Judge had aJlowed the appticatiDH jt- Order 39 Ruies 1 & 2 ofthe CPC aj.id iii favour of tlie petitioner by clirectiiig hefeiii not to m.teribre withtlie pQ.ss.cssiou ^tly tlll the dlsposal ofsult. l.msel for tlie pa-rties, |:ie petitioxier placiiig rellaiice on th.e fcii tlie matt.er of Jai^ Swetambar Piaii^adaM reported m AIR 1999 SC late court was not entiUed to mteriere [passed after satisfymg that the piioia- |was made out ou merite uuless tlie tJjie coiiclusion that the trial court has |rtnia-facie satisfactiou aiid sctting asidc le material on record because it lias not |:enal or because it has enoneously felusious ou tlie facts established, He XI-HC-22 3T^?T^T R-ii<=h3:n^r ^RW^cT \^ 3^T ^TPTM^, ^Tf^FT^, f^<ni^^< 3n^T^^' ^—....K(>t'2lp.&7. ^TPT^T^Tra?""w"t'o'^"y*0^0 W[ 200 W^T^n'^K^f^f of tl'ial leak'ned farther argued tliat origmal Nos. 1097/1,1098/1, 1099/ thc mother of Maiisaram. purciiased the lancl beailiig 1321/5 area 0.097 hectar4s 6.9,2000 from Mansai'aBi aij' lancl, tlierefore, tlie respondt possession of thc petitioiicr. appellate court is peiverse, has set aside fhe fmdmg ou record and contraiv to Uid Ou tlie other liaiid that the land beariHg F.liasraj belongmg to Ketlci Bai»mot4 Acquisition Officer for K^r? conipeusation of Uie s^iiie Ketld Bai, Thereaft.er, on Qiiruhari. Nimiaa Socicw ao.4 sold some portion of lajid Nimian Samiti, out of this petitioner hereiri aiid the Klian, who sold the la-iicl to rcspoudent purchascd thcsc aiid Pramila Greli Nirmaaii Sta Whereas, the petitionet tlie lai.id, which was solcl tfc 4)i^t<n41^ WR^ff ^ te^ ^^i< ^3:rf^R"3TT^T ^wner oflaud m questiou beariug Khasra p. & 1321/1 was Late Ket.ki Bai, who was after hcr dcath the peutioner had ^hasra Nos. 1097/5, 1098/5, 1099/5 & ar4s thTOUgh a registercd sale deed ou s|d siiice tlieii he is in. possession of Uiat [^ut is not eutitled to uiterfere with the pe further argucd th.at tb.e xiadiug of the l&r tiie reason tiiat tlie appellate court court witliout exammmg tiie material settled piiiiciples of law, counsel for tlie respondent ai'Rued Nos. 1097/11098/1, 1099/1 & 1-321/ 1 l.er of Ma.iisaram was acqulred by tlie [4i'?uiichaii Greh Nirman Samiti aiid a(iiountisig Rs,38,186/- was paid to said t.9.1998 tliat Samiti sold tliat laiid to on 27.5/2000 Guruhari Niiinaii Socicw Etd^ieasmliig 0.198 hecati'e to Pramil Greh p£}i'ticularlaiid Maiisaram sold the laj:id to r€]m.aiaing l^iid was sold to oiie Fariikh Shaiiti Fiatech Ltd, ao.d LiltimatelY the jtwo groups of laiid fro3B. Shauti Fiatech S^miti aiid he is m possession. is claimmg that he is m possession of r€|m.s 3 liini by Maasai'am. There. is aiiotlier XI-HC-22 3TI^?T^T f^Tf^3:Tr^r ^pwdN ^SN<v8f$b^8cts 3:^[^iTqT^T, ^T?i^^!^, f^^ll<-l^< W^TqX^ ^...i^.t.r.......^ 200 W^T^cTTW^fN' s< dispute witii regm^. to the m^ petitiouer is claimiiig that 011 Maiisaram. his naine. has y wiiereas, tlie responde.nt i^ purchasers from time to nme| records aad tliey were io. pos^ Leaj-iied Trial Coiirt. a^ asccrtainuig the actziaJ pQSltpU mto tlie legal aspect of tlie c^ pas^ed fhe tmpugned orders. tbe Coniiiiissioiier was niove^ tlie saxo.e was rejected by th| circumstances & counter cl^ decide ttie applicatlon filed l^ mjunction the trial ought to of tlie m'ea as Commissioner | report existiiig as on dat^ contradictoi^ claims m.ade y circuinstaiices, It 1s not app^ and the orders passed by the ] In tlie result, the pet^ i^assed bv tlie leaiiied Acldi dated 15.3.2005 passcd by llerebv set. aside aiid tlie matjter to decide the application cousideiiag tlie riyal claids ct)l<4lcrl41<rl TTTR^ff ^* te^ ^f^T^R ^3Ti^TW^T itation ol nojne 10. revexiue records, tjie tlie basis of purchase made bv liim froin ccu niutated ni thc rcveniic records, clalmiiig tliat names of respecTive have also been miitated m the revemie essiou. well as FirBt Appellate Coiut without LOU frora. the rccord and wifhout goirig Eise regai'duig possession of Uie paTties Even fh.e applicatiou for appoinmient of 1 0x1 behalf of the petitioner herciii but trial court., Lookiiig to tlie facts aiicl dins niadc by the part.ics, ia ordcr to 'y tlie petltloner for graiit of.temporaiy have appomted the TehsildaT (Revenue) aiid clirected hmi to subinit his factual ou the site as weU as about the y ffac partics. Thcrcfore, in fae abovc 'opriate to decide tiie matter 011 siierits courts below arc uable to be set aside. tiou is allowed, order dated 7.4/2005 tional District Judge. Raipiu' & order .eamed Civil Judge Class-I, Raipiu- are is remaiidcd back to tlie Civil Judge :ifrcsh m accordance with law after aiade by tlie pai'ties, above docuisieiits XI-HC-22 3T1^?T^T ^i<=h3T[^T '^iW^T ^O^^LA./^ y 3^[ ^l^^rl^l, i^rft^PTg'^ fc|^IH^< 3TI^T ^s^^ ^I^^T^RT^^......I^UT.. ^ 200 ^R^S' 3TI^T?^TT^K^N -^iid also tlie f^ctiuil & legal p positioii leaiiied Civil Jlidge i tlic ajrca coucemcd as C^oiniiilssioncr, to which leanied couuscl for tiie parties lierein has no obje.< the site iu presence of boti regai'dm.g actual position Le. report. about tlie factual pos: cxecuted by the partics aiid ^tion and direct the Tehsildar to mspect the parttes and siibmit his report posse^sion cn Uie site as weU as to fcion based on the various sale deeds 1'fher acqiusitiou prQccedio.gs. Tiil theu tlie pai'ties ai'e cliiTcted to mau|itaiii stat.us quo. At this stage 'leanied c\ after reversal of ox'der dated respoudeut herein has encroa|( construction, For tliis the petiuoner comt aiid to amend the suit a^ before the trial court, the res directed to decide Qie appUca within a period of one month orcier, Witli the obseivation at: disposcd of. AU tlie pendmg appUcat| Certified copy as per ruJ| <=M<4?^i41'i WT^ff ^' te^t ^^di< ^3Tf^T3TI^T sitioii. In order to ^.scertoio. tlie f^.ct.ual [laU appoio.t tlie Tehsildai' (Revenue) of miisel for the petitioner submits tliat 15.3.2005 by tlie appeUate coiirt, the ^hed upon his laiid ancl raised certaiii las to make a pra^'er before the trial 'cordmgly, however, till the appUcation is decided after all this exerci^e and tlie petitiouer ni^Lkes the prayer ^oncleiit is directed to ijacxiiitaiii stat.us quo with rcgard to fhe couBtt:ucuou work also, The Civil Judge is ion after completiag tlie above exercise from the date of rcceipt of copy of this id clirectious aloresaid, the petition is ons ai'e also stmid dlsposed of, s, ^ Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge M ^'