‘AYf’ x HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISd-ARH AT BILASPUR w.P. (227) No. 3245/2011 Tushar Kanti Bose, son of LatC Rasik fLal Bose aged about 75 ‘ years“ R/o Brmdavan Colony, \ Jagdalpur D1str1ct Baster (C G ) RESPONENTS: PETITIONER PLAINTIFF VERSUS 1. I Sri H§ar1pad Deonath son ofi Amntalal Deonath (correct name Amrltle‘Il. Mechamc, Deonath), N.-M.D‘C. Bacheli, Plant § Tehsil and District Dantewada ' State {of Chhattisgarh, Through Collector Jagdalpur, District r ' Bastar‘ (C.G.). LL \9 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF‘ THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. (SB :Hqn"ble Mr. T.P.Sharma, J.) Present Shrl Vishnu Koshta Advocate for the petitioner Shri Sumlt Jhanwar P L for the State/respondent No 2 None for the respondent No 1 although served ORAL- ORDER (Passed on 16/08/2011) By this petition under Article 227‘ of the Constitution of India K petitioner has challenged the legality and propriety of the order dated 10/5/2011 'passed by 3rd Civil Judge Class—2; Jagdalpur V (C.G.) in civil suit No. 18—A/09 whereby 3rd Civil Judge Class—2, ,agdalpur (C.G.) has provided opportunity of filing written J statement to the Ludru 8L Chaitram namely legal representatives of deceased Budru, As per certlfied copy of the order impugned present petitioner has filed suit against respondent No 1 Sri Haripad Deonath and State of Chhattisgarh exparty. During pendency of the suit, respondent x No. 1 has filed an‘application for impleading one Budru as a purchaser ‘and defendant but subsequently it comes into knowledge that Budru has died then again respondent No. 1 has filed Kan application then application fpr impleading legal I Wb‘ ‘ representatives of Budru namely Eudru 85 Chaitram vide application dated‘26/ 1/2011. Notice has‘ beeri issued to them, rthey made their appearance through’counsel'on 10/5/2011 and made a ‘ request that Court has provided time to file written statement. Order-sheet reveals that Court has not permitted to implead Ludru 8L Chaitram as defendants and they have not been “pleaded as defendants therefore, there was no propriety for passing aforesaid order and providing opportunity for filing written statement. It appears that as prayed counsel for the Ludru 8L Chaitram Court below has provided opportunity of filing reply of the application filed by respondent No. 1 and may be as bonafide mistake it has ; been recorded as opportunity for filing written statement.’ Consequently, petition is disposed of with the following directions alleged Ludru 8r, Chaitram may file reply, application filed on behalf of the respondent No. 1 for impleading them as defendants. Court i is required to provide opportunity of defending such application to present petitioner and after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, respondent No. 1, alleged Ludru 85 Chaitram; Court gshall pass the order afresh in accordance with law relating to impleading of Ludru 81, Chaitram as defendants. All interim applications are also dismissed. No od rer as to cos. ts - Sd/- t / T.P. Sharma / Judge if . 7‘;