;.i.i.i;-iiaiMB8 ,-d,:i<!.ie5i ^.^ii.;SRi ^ •:,'^5P; 1N THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATriSGARH AT BILASPUR 8econd Appeal No. ? 2-3/'200i^ APPELLANTS DEFENDANTS ^ .^S>"7 ^•%''"/ ^^•:'y AV. .-:' ^ • ^y^ ^/ ** ^y A' .1. 2. 3. f ^' ^' 6. 7. .^ .<\ <~ <y-^^' <.' / Versus RESPONDEWT ..PIAINTIFF Darashraai S/ o Buthru, aged about 60 years. t-^.t.'* SargheenW/o DarasluSm, Aged aboiit 48 years. Kondaram S/o Biifhlu, Aged about 52 vears. Bhagwat Prasad 8/ o Bodhraia Aged about 50 years. tam. Prasad S/o Bodliram, Aged about 45 yea.rs. Shyamlal 8/0 Bodbram, Aged about 38 years. Panchram S/o Bodliraiu, Aged about 36 years. Budga S/ o Bodhratu, Aged about 35 years. Santraai S/ o BocUiraia, Aged about 31 years. Afl R/o Vfflage-Satihabliatlia, Barpali, Post- BarpaU, Tehsil- Kartala, District- Korba (C.O.) , Sflhetter Singh S/o Late Johaa Siugli, aged about 27 years, Caste- Kanwer R/ o ViUage- Dongribhatha, Tehsil- Kartala, District- Korba (C.G.), f» J|,3?V^» ,. . 3,<'o ^- \ 3,0.&, Being aggrieved by fhe Judgment and Deca-ee dated 19.9.2003 passed by fhe Additiotial District Judge, Korba in Civil Appeal No. 12^./.g002 ariamg out of the Order dt. ».- ' , . .. »-^^ 1 - 16.10.2002 pasaed in Civfl Suit No, 167-A/2002 by the 'C-sril Judge Class-II, the appellants prefers fhis appeal on the foUowing facts and grounds. FACTS OP.THE CASE a.»w^t HK3H COURT OF CHHATnSQARH AT BIIASWJR r*,s,-.!^ Sinate Bench: Hontrie Shri Justice PrashantKumarKUshraK APPELLANTS DEFENDANTS RESPONDEhn- PLAINTIFF Swond Appeal No. 123/2084 Darashram and (rtherfe v»sus Sahdtar Siigh Shri Neera] Clwybey, coui^d fortheappeUants. SECOND APPEAL UNDER SECTIQhL' PROCEDtHlE ORALORDER (16^.2810) aa Heard on admisston. !!i^f,i8-II!N]igig?: (2) The trial Court. wde te wl»dated 16^0-2(^ disnwssed^^^ pteintifFs appUcation under Qreter 22 Rute 3 of C.P.C. and;uRcter»ife, Sectkm 5 of Umitation Act and cBsmtesed the suit as abalediy LRs of> sk, "ss^ the orginal plaintiffJohin Sii^ had prefeired^M|x^^ under Order 43 Rute 1(1^ of C.PjC. to chaltenge the tred €oyit»fder» dated 16-10-2002. (3) It appeare at fli^ apReU^e Couithasfegis^ :'8<1 appeal ami aUowedthea^iealtthCTdby^hgasideiftietmte^ by the trial Court. As a opnsequea^ <nder of aba^ the tri^ C<K»thas been s^-sekle and suft has been.rCTto cW hearir^ on ments. TheaRpel(zrte Cw.irt.has.framed a the appellate Court vras hearing a mrecellaneous a|ipealaiMlaw^g!a« ^ T^ular first appeat. ":€ •^Sl* K fy^r ^••3 -3. (4) The present second appeal under Sectiwi 100 ofcC.P.C. ha^ ^ been preferred againstjlhe saki order ofthe first appettato Court.»a {S) In the qiiruon of thte Court, an oreter presat by thes app^lerte &.,„ Court under C^der 43 Rute 1 of C.P.C. te nd appeadableiundwSe^ltore fe^ 100 of C.P.C. The instant secwid appeal is not inaintangl^. ^lti &^^^^^^^ ^ accocdingly dismissed a®nc* maintainaMe. (€) If the app^tants so desire, he may insKtute a{^»^ate%^ proceeding to chaltei^e the appeUate wder. The certtfte<tcopy"9f;the ^ impigned oider be rehimed tothe counsel for the ap^dl^tealW^^^^^^^^ retaining a Xerox copy thereof in the record ofthe secqnd anreal. „ Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge