RE AT BILASPQE OURT OF JUDICATU CE? of 20gw DEFENDANT NO.1 KRISHI FARM, G.E.ROAD, m THE H1GH c gVIL REVISION N0. SINGH SARDAR OWNER VERSUS LAINTIFF/r;,::é;-' .w'" gywe’ /1>ARSAD1 SATNAMI SA SON TNAMI, , OF P ? § I - ', SHRI TAHSIL ANDIT & DISTRICT- I 2r” RAIPUR. STATE OF , g” THROUGH IPUR. 6% NON- APTLICANTS/ 1 ‘ y???“ Vw/ w" ER SECTION 115 OF CODE (E gvm REVISION CIVIL UNI) PROCEDURE f,» V CHHATTISGARH THE HE—EM. ”gam ”I. #HE%M P M #m Qa?‘ii R § i § hairemmrerm—4s/9sai1,20% i rm 0004 3%: WW, We .t x9, Wag: WW WW§ECK§§/ 32W? *mg (tgfg’a‘gm %m em E’EW{ @Y‘E‘VY Wrii‘gf : i $3. Han‘bie Shri Jusiice MK. arw&i 93. @$.200$ Shri Vivek Chogi‘a, Advocagte for appiicant appears on behalf 6f 3m BP Sharma. % Learned counSei appeari g for the agépiicani, an in$%é’uc%§an, $eeks permissian of this courf‘t withdraw this fevision with ,Iibwy 'io avail agpropriate remedy i‘na’iimay be avaiiabie ‘io him under me provisisns o iaw. Prayer is aiiov ed. Corieequen’ciy, the revisio is dismissed as Withda’awn with ihe above Siaied liberty. Na orci r aeto masts. Lear‘rieci ceuesei 'fei’ ihe a‘ ‘piica’n‘i praye ihai oer‘iified copy of ihe impugned order be rammed i0 him. i Registry is directed to i’etum i‘he ceriiiied capy of the impugneci order on ceumsei’s fuiiriisriing auihen‘iiea‘ieei Ewe cepy ef ”the earrre. Caneequeritiy peedimg apr iica’riens grand diemeed 01