IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR fC.G.] CIVIL REVISION N0. l'4 /2011 APPLICANT Defendant no. 1 ^ ,,...-^^ ....•••••^.-^...--'" •^•"'L-.'O'i''. A'r-V^ ^v^e^\'~ t^^ ^ \^.^1 - vo^G /NQN-APPLICANTS 1^'^•^s^ ij ^•1 '"' *'-wlf" \ •-&5[t5[lSl5^aJ_^ Harish ChandraArora S/o late Shri Atma Ram Arora Aged-about 70 years R/o Main Road Korba, Tahsil SE Distt.- Korba [C.G.] VERSUS l.R.K.Singh S/o Late Sri L.N.Singh caste- Rajput Aged-about 55 years, R/o Paadiriiaar, Balco Nagar, Korba, Tahsil 8s Distt.- Korba [C.G.] !. Gopal Modi Aged-about 44 years S/o Narayan Prasad Modi R/o Near bajarang Talkies, Korba Tahsil & Distt.- Korba [C.G.] -3. Anil Pahuja Aged-about 40 years S/o Laxaman Das Pahuja R/o Near Machchali Market, Itwari Bazar, Korba, Tahsil 8s Distt.- Korba [C.G.] -4. State of Chhattisgargh Through- Collector, Korba, Distt.- Korba [C.G.] CIVIL REVISION UNDER SECTION 115 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE \N HiGH COURT OP CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CIV8L REVISION N0.14 OF 2011 Harish Chandra Arora DEFENDANT R.K. Singh and others. CIVIL REVISIQN UNDER SECTiON 115 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE -«>. (SinaSe Bench: Hon'ble Shri N.K. Aaarwal. J.l Present : Shri Sanjay Patel, counsel for the applteant. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 2nd Day of February, 2011) Heard on i.A. No.01, application for condonation of delay in fiting the revision. 2. On due consideration, the grounds mentioned in the application ! am satisfied that the appiicant has succeeded In exp!aining the cause of deiay in filing the revision. Therefore, the application is allowed and the detay caused in filing the revislon is hereby condoned. 3. Heard on admission. 4. The !egality and propriety of the brder dated 08-10-2010 (Annexure P-4) passed by 2nd Additional District Judge, (F.T.C.), Korba in Civi! Suit No.l-A/2010 is under assail in the instant revision. 5. Facts in brief according to applicant are that: Respondent No.1 instltuted a suit' against the appllcant as wel! as respondents No.2 to 4 ciaiming the reiief of declaration of title over the sult property and also to declare the order passed by Naib Tahsitdar in Revenue Case No.6A/70/2005-06 dated 30- 04-2008'as itiegal and void. The applicant herein preferred an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'the CPC') for dismissat of the suit ¥w inter-alia on the ground that so far as reiief No.18 (b) is concerned, the suit is not maintainable. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the applicant and having perused the order impugned, in the considered opinion of this Court this revision is devoid of merit. The main relief claimed in thepiaint is dr -laration of title over the suit property, therefore, it cannot be said that the entire suit is barred under some provisions of law. Looking to the nature of the dispute raised by the applicant,th6 dispute can be decided based on the pleadings and after framing the issue in thls behalf, If such plea is taken by the applicant, in the written statement. 7. At this stage, 1 do not find any illegality in the order passed by the trial Court. Further if the instant revision is allowed and the order is passed in favour of the applicant, it will not dispose of the suit. 8. In view of the above, the instant revision faiis and is hereby dismissed. Sd'- N.K.Aganwai Judne