c" ic K-'"yifth lilt b..^^-"8 S^sS^I^ (^) i0 IN THE HON'BLE HI6H COURT OF C.G. AT BILASPUft W. P. (227) N0. I \ ^ ^OF 2010 PETTTIONER/ Defendant No. 15 / Dwarika Das Bhutda, aged about 63 years, S/o Late Shri B.C. Bhutda, R/o Kranti Nagar, Bilaspur, Tahsil <& District-Bilaspur (C.G.) .^y RESPON&ENTS/ Plaintiffs ^A'sy ..^ .v" ^,>K--'" /' .*' ^7 ^^ •t'^'" VERSUS :1. Oefendants ^4. ^5. ^6. ^ 8. Rajesh, aged about 35 years, S/o Kakku Ram, Ashok, aged about 32 years, S/o Kakku Ram, Rupesh, aged about 30 years, S/o Kakku Ram, Bhagwati Devi, aged about 60 years, W/o Kakku Ram, Kamla, aged about 42 years, D/o Kakku Ram, Parmeshwari, aged about 37 years, W/o Kakku Rdm, Aasha, aged about 24 years, W/o Kakku Ram, All Caste-Sindhi, R/o Chakarbhatha Camp, Tahsil-Bilha, Distn'ct-Bilaspur (C.G.) Maniram, S/o Bhagoli, aged about 70 years Beniram, S/o Bhagoli, aged about 63 years, Sheetai, aged about 35 years, S/o 11. Santu, aged about 30 years, S/o Bharat -12. Dharam, aged about 25 years, S/o Bharat -13. bilharan, aged about 17 years, S/o Bharat -14. Mohan, aged about 13 years, S/o Bharat Respondents No. 13 <& 14 are minor through mother Kari Bai 15. Indu Bai, aged about 20 years, D/o Bharat 16. Kari Bai, aged about 50 years, Wd/o Bharat, Respondent No. 8 to 16 are Caste- Kanaujiya, R/o Village-Bodri, Tahsil- Bilha, Distnct-Bilaspur (C.G.) ^ 17. 6anga Bai, aged about 36 years, D/o Salikram, W/o Budhram Sihare, R/o Viltage-Bodri, Tahsil-Bilha, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) A8. Manju, aged about 24 years, D/o Salikram, W/o Nandkumar, R/o Seepat, Distnct-Bitaspur (C.G.) 19. State of Chhattisgarh, through-Collector, Bilaspur (C.(5.) /-20. Ramkishan S/o Parma Suryawanshi, aged about 60 years, R/o Village- Bodri, bistrict-Bilaspur (C.6.) 21. (a) Kan" Bai Devi, Wd/o Muritram, aged about 60 years, . i, S/o Muritram, aged about 27 years, a» A- s "(c) Virendra, S/o Muritram, aged about 25 years, /(d) Pradeep, S/o Muritram, aged about 20 years, Respondent No. 14 (a) to (d) R/o Village-Chhatauna, Tahsil-Bilha, District-Bilaspur (C.6.) WRFT PETCTION UN&ER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTTTUTEON OF INMA HIGH COUKT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR t Sincrte Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justtee Prashant Kumar ftUshra PETmONER Defendait No.15 RESPONDENTS Plaintiffe Writ Petition <2271 No.1172 / 20W Dwarika Das Bhifcta Vereus R^esh and ottiere. Shri Ratnesh Kumar Agrawad, counsel for the petitioner. Shri SanjeevAgrawal, P.L for the Sterte/respdndertNq, 19. t^m WRIT PETmON UNUERARTtCLEZZ? OF THE CONSTmrTONOF INDIA ': ;: ' ^.':,,:';";.;,1^ ORALOROER (19J»3^01(Q The trial Court has rejected the defendaitfs appUcartton under a Sectton 7 of the Court Fees Act for a directkai toVne pteuntiffe tofay s^ propCTCourtfee. * s y {2} The suit prefeired by the respqndents No. 1 to 7 is a siBt^br » declaration and pennanent mjunctkMi. The planBffe tiave valuedthe 3,,^ suitieper para No. 15 pfttwplaint. (3) The trtal Court has found that an issue reganft^i yaluertion and . ^ payment of Court fee inthe suit has been ftamedfw trtetf. (4) In view of the above, siiwe ttiis jssue wiU be deaded alqng wflth.s „< ;";°t <rther Issues in the tnal, there js no errwofjurialtetioncommitteditiy,, - »;ff!.<l.iftlIS3!i.;,J!,°N ttie trial Court In rejecUng the pjrtffi<mer ap{riicartion under Secfkm-e of -the Court Fee Act. (5) Accordingly, the writ pet'rtion is dismissed. "^a'.;.; ?^"^': Sd//- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge K