PETITIONER Dafendant No.3 RESPONDENTS Plainw No. 1 Defendant No. 1 Versus Defendant No.2 w.p. 42271 no. 928/2009 Uttamchand, aged about 643mm, S/o. Sjro Ljattpp,a;. R/o. Badhai Para, Raipur Tahsil and District Raipur {CG} Roshanlal, aged about 28 years, S/o. $h1'i Namichand BhamaH, R/o. Edward Road, Raipur(CG) ’ M] s. Uttam Stores— Partnership Firm (Now dissolved) through Snkhmmdas, S/o. Late Shri Khattoomal, R/o. Badhai Pam, Raipur, Tah. 8r. Distt. Raipur (CG) Sukhram, aged about 57 years, S/ o. Late Shxti Khattoomal, R/o. Badhai Para, Tahsil and District Raipur (CG) Deleted Deleted Deleted Bastimal @ ReopOvhand Lalwani, aged about 65 years, partner Uttam Stores, Gole BaZar, Raipur (CG) M/s. Jain Brtohers, through R Bastimal @ Roopchand, Gale Bazar, Raipur (CG WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA / ) Appearance: Shri G.D.Waswani, counsel for the petitioner. Shxi G.S.Agxawa1, Sr. Advocate with Shri Sudaep Vanna, counsel for mspondcnt No. 1/ plaintiE. om ORDER (23.04.2009) Challsnge in the pmsent writ petition is the order dated 5.12.2008 pasSed by IX'h Additional District Judge, Raipur in Case No. 7 3/2002 by which the Court below has rejected the application as med by the defendant No.3 under Section 7 of the Chhatu'sgarh Money Lendels Act, 1934 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedme. v By this applicau’on, it had been prayed by the counsel for the petitioner/(defendant No.3 that before deciding the suit on merits, additional issue be h‘amed in respect of compliance of Section 3 sub-Section (1) of the Money Lenders Act, 1934 and be decided. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1 vely fairly submits that he has no objection if the additional issue is framed and decided before deciding the matter on merits. In View of the above fact, the petition is allowed. The Court below is directed to &ame addih'onal issue as prayed in the application dated 5.122008 (Annexure P/ 4) and decide the same in accordance with law. It is, being made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and the court below would be at liberty to decide the case suictly in accordance with-law and, on the basis of pleadings and evidence of the parties. Sdl- Pritinker Diwaker Judge