^V IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ^ ,h ^ Jw ^ ^'M1 1»1 ^ AT BILASPUR Review Petition No. SJL Of 2011 PETITIONER APPELLANT RESPONDENTS ^a^s^ ^^y: .^",..•••" o^^" o^ ^'r \\ ^ 2. 7. 8. Tarachand Jangade, S/o Antarain, aged about 45 years, R/o Village Mutpuri, P.S. Nandghat, Tahsil Bemetara, Distt.-Durg (C.G.) VERSUS Smt. Sukhni Bai, Wd/o Kejurara Yadav, aged about 29 years. Ku. Gayatri D/o Kejuram Yadav, aged about 15 years, Onkar S/o Kejuram Yadav, aged about 13 years. Ku. Maharani, D/o Kejuram. Yadav, aged about 10 years. tCu. Rohani, D/o Kejurani Yadav, aged about 6 years. Ku. Rani, D/o Kejurara Yadav, aged about 4 years. Petitioner No. 2 to 6 are minor, through natural guardian Smt. Sukhni Bai. Smt. CUuH^ Bai, W/o Pardeshi Yadav, aged about 55 years. Pardeshi S/0 Ballu Yadav, Aged 60 Years. All Are Resident Of Village Mutpuri, P.S. Nandghat, Tahsil Bemetara, Distt. Durg (C.G.) CLAIMANTS/RESPONDENTS No. 1 to 8 9. ^uri?b S^.tnami @ Gajendra, S/o ^Wi»^lrk@) Das (Driver) aged about 2'S years, R/o Village Khapri, Police Station Nandghat, Tahsil Bemetara, Distt. Durg (C.G.) '^ 10. National Insurance Company Limited, Branch Offlce -I, Bhutani Complex, G.E. Road, Ware House, Bhilai (C.G.) RESPONDENT 9 fislO r REVIEW APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR CORAM: Hon'bte Shri I.M. Quddusi. J. & Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kunnar Mishra. J. PETITIONER APPELLANT RESPONDENTS PETITIONER APPELLANT RESPONDENTS REVIEW PETmON No.86 of 2011 TarachaQd Jangade. Versus Smt. Anand Kumari and others. AND REVIEW PETmON No.91 of 2011 Tarachand Jangade. Versus Smt. Sukhni Bai and others. REVIEW PETITION UNDERORDER47 RULE 1 C.P.C.. 1908 Shri H.B. Agrawal, Senior Advocate with Smt. Meera Jaiswal, counsel for the petitioners. ORAL ORDER (29/09/2011) Following oral order of the Court was passed by I. M. Quddusi. J. The aforesaid Review Petitions are disposed of by this common order as the petitioner in both the petitiore is same. IA. No.1, application for condonatfon of delay in filing the petition. On due consideration. delay is condoned. The entire amount was directed to be deposited by the appellant vide order dated 01/03/2011 in MA.(C) No. 1636/2008 and MA(C) No. 1637/2008 but the appellant is unable to deposit and proceedings are held up before the Claims Tribunal, therefore. in the interest ofjustice we direct that in place of the entire amount, half of the amount shall be deposited within three montte. Both the review petition are disposed of with the above observation and the order dated 1st h4arch, 2011 passed in M.A.(C) No. 1636^008 and M.A.(C) No. 1637/2008 shall stand modified. ---•• Sd'- I.M.Quddusi Judge Judge K