'.'-^^. E-—. IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBLLASPUR W.P.fU/A 227) NO. ^^r2- /2011 PETITIONERS PLAINTIFFS ,Y1....^ ..'.^•^ vV'../-<^>'' i'--::y/v ...-••••y'^'' ^' •^l] [r'2] s^^ y^'' ^41 RESPONDENTS DEFENDANTS ^ ^/ 1] -2] -5] ^6] Smt Jamuna, D/o. late Ganpat lal, aged about 55 years, Satishkumar, S/o. late Ganpat lal, aged about 63 years, Trilokchand, S/o. late Ganpat lal, aged about 45 years, Smt Chitkunwar, D/o. late Ganpat lal, aged about 61 years, Above all by caste Jaiswal, R/o. Sakti, Ward No. 9, Tahsil Sakti District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) VERSUS Sureshkumar, S/o. late Manohar lal, aged about 35 years, Dinanath, S/o. late IVIanohar lal, aged about 50 years, Above both by caste Agrawal R/o. Sakti, Ward No. 6 Hatari Chowk, Sakti Tahsil Sakti District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) The State of Chhattisgarh through the Collector Janjgir-Champa Lakhanlal, S/o. late Manohar lal, aged . about 55 years, by caste Agrawal, R/o. Sakti, Ward No. 6 Hatari Chowk Sakti, Tahsil Sakti District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) Ramdulari, W/o. Dileshwar Jaiswal aged about 36 years, R/o. Village Jongara, Tahsil Sakti District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) Vimalkumar, S/o. Biharilal Agrawal, aged about 27 years, R/o. Village Sakti (Rajapara), Tahsil Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa -(T WRIT PETITION UNDERARTICLE 227 QFTHE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PBTITIONBRS PLAINTIFFS RBSPONDBNTS DBFBNDANTS W.P. (U/A 2271 No. 7762/2011 Snit. Jamuna and others VER^US Sureshkumar aiid others WRIT PETITION UNDBR ARTICLE 227 OF THB CONSTITUTION OF IWDIA, (SB :Hon?bie Mr. T.P.Sharma, J.) Present:-Shri Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate with Shri Vikram Dixit, Advocate tbr the petitioners. Shri Akhil Agrawal, P.L. forthe State/respondent No. 3. Respondents No. 1, 2 &4, 5&6 not noticed. QRDER (Passedoa 16/12/2011) By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India petitioners have challenged tlie legality and propriety of the order dated 22/10/2011 passed by Civil Judge Class-1 Sakti (C.G.) in civil suit No. 11A/2007 whereby secoud appUcation for appouitaieut of Coniiaissioner for local uivestigation has been disinissed. On perusal of fhe order impugiied, I do not find aay iUegaUty in the order ioipugned requiriiig aiiy interference ia exercise of supervisory jiirisdiction. Consequently, petition is liable to be disinissed aiid is hereby dismissed. No order as to coste. 3, Interim appUcation is also dismissed, Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge •il-