SN?a Sanch INTHE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR. WRIT PETITION N0. 2-6'^OF 2005 PETITIONER Plaintiff RESPONDENTS;^l .i '"^^T' Oetencte.n.fes; i a-'' •**< t i-<h*'*" ^ ,*' ^^s^ ^^^^ ^<<^"l^.-s" ^^^> <•'.^y'^h^ fiF'.T-ii' f\j)/"t.s\»6' •^ \*r .•'%°••'' \'. ^' ^Ghhabilal S/o Mukutram Lodhi aged about 53 years R/o Village Thandar Tah. ChhuiKhadan, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) VERSUS . Mangalchand Parakh, S/o Uttamchand Parakh aged about 70 years, R/o "Mangaldeep" G.E. Road, Rajnandgaon ^. Ishwar S/o Bhikham Lodhi, aged about 35 years R/o ViUage Thandar, Tah. Gandai, TaK. Chhuikhadari, Distt. Rajnahdgaan C.G. "3. StateofChhatfisgarh,Through:The . Collector, Rajnandgaon, (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDERARTICLB 227 OFTHE CONSTITUTIQNOF l^ iilBiili •sii^i^i R;-)IW> ^T-ST^T^R^ \St. *11*<W8»*TW 'SrcT •^l^lfl*)^ ^Tll''9'i|(», fadl'Mll,< l.^s SiI^I l^t> l('jq!y«i<l) ttaiW^lftif 3D^E 31-1-2005 Shri Rajesh Pande:Y, counsej Shrj Sanjoy 5. Agrdwoit, The petitioner has prefe^ 227 of the Constitution of Indii 4-1-2005 whereby the tearned ti^ filed by the petitionerhereinund^ amendment bf the 'issues thdt isj para 12-Aand 12-Boftheplaint. I hwe heard learned counsfc The petitioner herein filejj the contrdct, cdncellation of t^ respondent No.2 by respond^r declttration.Qf .title on the basiN against respdndent Nb.l hereiri. amendment the .petitioner herein^ that fand in question is in pos^< years, therefore,'he hds beco respondent No.l has rio right to ^a Vide impugned order the application on two counts that is[ the oetitioner is coverci-i ].inri'»rl forthepetitioner. : V ©o^ernmentAdvocate for the State. fred this writ petition ynder Article i^i being oiggrieved by the order ddted fidl Court has rejeeted fhe gpplication l^riOrdef- XIV. Rule &of tfie|C. P.C^ for addin9 one more issue in view of the ^l'irf^ft^ ilT*ic^^ Psi<i <f^'t-$i< ^3ffii?ran^?T ' - ^l for •the petitioner on'aclfflission. ; a suit for Specific perfQrmgnce of le sale deed executed in fdvour of ^nt No.l, perpetual injurietion and of occupancy of -rtie land iri questjoh In para-12-B of the plaint by way of inserted an amendment to the effect ^ssion of the petitioner sirace last 4 |ne the owner ,pf the Idnd, as Such hle tfte property of respondent No.2. leqrned trkil Court- has rejected the in sum^and substonce,praYer rnade; by I's'aw N0.5.. JlAoreover ,ds far-ds ^he l^f: B: »M Gt.PRJ—FS/350-12/2000—50,000. 7SF;T^TB|'RPT, ynly'Ko, Fs(dl'ytj,< .£.i...MS.... % 311^1 '•flf (1?tyi'i^): an^'wft-fi* ^is?r sn^r'spqt^' L <.-' •^^ iarve 6«l|l<R'dfef CT^I — •c^- 1 Cfciurt ipu^ned question of decltirafion bf title on the petitioner is concerned, as per the Land Revehue Code the Civil the title dnd for •1+iat purpose tt^ theRevenue Court. Having perused the pleading) am of the opinion that the trial or irregularity in poissing the im[ mentioned that as far as declaratl occupancyy of,,lfce..<xgricultt.iraLln^ specific: jurtsdictidn of tde Reyerji right to try tha suit, therefore, right to try the iuit. I do not fin^l This writ petition is not maintainaljile it is accordin9ly dismissed. . Consequently, M.(W.)P., Ni|: stand dispbsed Qf. finU <ftt<f[(ri41l H!*«tff^f 'f^Zt <R[ $1< ^3if?iH3u^r accountcif'foup-years' pccupaney of the provisions of Section 257(o) of pourt has no jurisdiction to .declare e petitioner '\s required tp' approach ^, impugned order and Fe|evcmt,!aw, I has not committed any illegdlity order. It hds sp?dficallY been on of title on account of^four years' ^cl: -is: conceFned^;tya* is;within t^ ue Coyrt and the ciyil Coyrt has no w tlTatextent, The civili Caurt'hais rio;; any infirmity in •fhe impi.fgined order. ile, same is tiable to be dismissed and .232/2005 andI.A. Mo.568^2Q65 1 Sd/- 1 LC.Bhadoo Judge Gi.oRJ—FS/350—12/2000—50,000. ^ "'!•• -v' .••!» x