w <3 iSmk {wch W WP. No.__:f3 (s8 /2004 AZIZ AHMED RIZVI, S/o Late Shri M. A. Wahid Rizvi aged about 44 years, Occupation - Govt. Service, R/o Chhotapara, Raipur, Tah. & Distt. Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS Petitioner Resgondents Natis Ahmed Rizvi aged about 54 years Naaz Ahmed Rizvi, aged about 36 years, Both sons of Late Shri M. A. Wahid Rizvi 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR V Ku. Tanveer Rizvi, aged about 40 years Ku. Parveen Rizvi aged about 38 years Ku. Yasmeen Rizvi, aged about 34 years ‘ Respondent No. 3 to 5 daughters of Late Shri M. A. Wahid Rizvi All resident s of H. No. 8/43; Chhotapara, Near Masjid, Raipur, Tah. & Distt. Raipur (C.G.) ,- WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THE w. CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE APPROPRI- ATE WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTIQ . XI—HC—78 (%1“ 36W,m,1%amgt Wm ”W'fuai.é.g./.n 200 WW (13W) WWW WWW WW§WW mmmm %aaf%wan%xr 22.1 .2007: Shri Ayaz Naved counsel fo ' the petitioner. The petitioner filed a civi suit for deciaration and permanent injunction against the respondents and in that suit an application for temporary injunction against interference in his peaceful enjoyment of the property was also filed. Applicatiot for temporary injunction was allowed. The appeal preferred by the respondents has also been allowed by the impugned order vide annexure P—‘S and the order of temporary injunction passed in favour of the petitioner has been set aside and being aggrieved by that this petition has been filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and the respondents are the family members, they are residing in different portions of a common house, how ever, the respondents are acting in such a manner which has affected the peaceful enjoyment of the petitioner of the suit house and in the afores‘ circumstances the relief of temporary injunction was prayed for whi h, however, has been refused for extraneous consideration. l have heard counsel for th petitioner and perused the plaint, order of temporary injunction passed favour of the petitioner as well as the impugned order. From perusal of the afor said documents this Court is of the considered opinion that there is o illegality or infirmity in the impugned order and the same has ‘been passed considering the fact that the petitioner and the respondents ar living together in a common house and they are the members of the sam family. Thus the order impugned do/es ad i XI-HC-78 3am,®¥f1w,i%lamgx C? WP Wég/au o¢.o ..oo.oo.oo.o. WW (13W) Wm WWW wmm mm&‘f§€r®w $7Wm mmwm this Court under Articie 227 of the Con$titution of 1ndia and as such the: petition being devoid of merit is Iiabie to be dismissed. tt is accordingly dismissed. Sd/— DHEENDRA MISHRA Judge not caii for any interference from // P.T.O. g