%.w HiQH COURT OF CHHATnSGARH AT BiLASPUR Sinaie Bench : Hon'bie Shri Diiip Raosaheb Deshmukh. J. Review Petitlon N0.32/M08 Appticant Dukataha Ram Sahu, aged about 57 yeare, S/o Late Shri Bahorik Sahu, R/o Village Tarenga, P. ri. No.1, Tahsii Bhathapara, District Raipur (C.G.5 Versus Respondent Tikaram Sahu, aged about 35 yeare, S/o Late Shri Udai Prasad Sahu, R/o Village Tarenga, P. H. No.1, Tahsil Bhathapara, District Raipur (C.G.) Review Petition under Rule 90 oTthe Chhattisaarh Hiflh Coyrt Rutes, 20C7 read with Section 114 and under Order 47 Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure. Present : - S'nri R. Pradhan, oounsei for the appiicant. Shn Maiay Kumar Bhaduri, counsel for the respondent. (Passed on this 7 dayof.ianuary, 2BOS) Heard on i.A.No.1, whteh is an application for condonatlon of de!ay in filing this review petition. (2) For ttie reasons mentioned in the apptication, it is ailowed and ths delay in filing this review petition is condoned. (3) Heard on the review application filed under Rule 90 of the Chhatti^arh High Court Rules, 2007 read with Section 114 and under Order 47 Rule 1 of Code of Civi' Procedure. (4) Shri R. Pradhan, learned counsel for the appiicant drew attention of this Court to a document FORM- 'C' "Certifioaie of grant of Bhumiswami's right in a buiiding site in fhe village site" and submitted that the respondent/appeliant has made intsrpoiation in the said document in the area of iand Khasra No. 1316/4 and has obtained decree bymaking fraud. (5) On the other hand, Shri M. K. Bhaduri, learned counsel for the respondent vehementiy opposes the submission of learned counsei for the appiioant while contending that no ground for review ofthe Court order dated 14 of January, 2008 passed in Second Appeal No.18 of 2008 exisis. (6) Having heard rivai contentlons, i have perused the annexure. No ground for review of the Court order dated 14 of January, 2008 passed in Second ^\^^.ii4^S^^^^^:S^S"SS'^^^?IE^^?% ss'"*t ^^^ ifes -2-. Appeal No.18 of 20Q8 is made out. The applicant is not precluded from instituting a fresh suit for a declaration that the judgment and decree dated 28-04-2007 passed in Civil Suit No.105-A/2006 was obtained by fraud. (7) As a result, the revievi/ petition is dismissed. ^:^^^ ,^ve'>to^e ^9^0s^e ^"' lu^ane.y