IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATriSGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition No.^lI7:/2005 PETITIQWERS / ^ ^ <A?N'..^Y\^" ^^y' ^^•^ P°' ^•^•'(KV-^ ^^ '^ ^ 1. Giija Devi, Wd/ o Late Shri Kamlakaat Jayaswal Aged about 6 STyears. 2. Rajesh Kuiuar^ S/o Late Shri Kamlakant Jayaswal, Aged about^y^ear^. 3, Indira aMas Sadhna, D/ o Late Shri Kamlakant Jayaswal, Aged about L(lyears< AU are r/ o TUak Nagar, Pratap Talldes Chowk., Bflaspur^ Tahsil and District- Bilaspur (C.G.). RESPOXD^NTS -Versus 1. Shri Ashok Kuinar, S/o Shri Raaidas Jayaswral, Aged aboiitl[^ears< ^J;' t ^^ f^>--l y- - " '- . ^ r^ Sushri Geeta Devi, D/ o Shri Ratndas Jayaswal, Aged about^ l years. Ho. 1 to 3 ore R/ o Tilak Nagar, Ramdas Petrol Pump» Bilaspur (C.G.). ^ Snit. Seeta Devi, D/o Shri Ranidas Jayaswal^ W/ o Shri Rishaa Prasad Gupta^ Mahavh: Ghat, Dawara Balia, District- BaUa (U.P.). ^ ^ ^ smt- Durga Deviy f o Shri Prem Shmikar. fo ."-T.1 ql^N^i^"l^w^^P^/ px.^ fee p<^ §.'7~Smt'. Shan& Devi, ^•'^p^'^'^^ W/o Sliri Hargovind Prasad, R/o C/o Shri Hargoviad Prasad Sudhir KuiKiar Jayaswral, AHpur Chowk, GoraMipur (U.P.).. v ; WR1T PETITIQN UNDER ARTICLE 1/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT OF MANDAMUS. PROHIBmON. CERTIORARI ETC.OR ANY OTHER DIJRECTION OR ORDER TO DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER. r Co XI-HC-78 *11Hc^ia?TT^ \jwc| ^UIWW^ Ul^ltt^Kff, RtcM^l^f .^e....±^JU.!>.L 3TT^?T q^F (ijill^el^) ^200 3n^?Tq5TR^ti<P ?mr3n^^T^h^i<h ?^rrwr^rfin an^$T 9.92005 <hl^lc641l^^l^c?r1¥^St ^Rn^ix ^3ri^T3^$T Shri Rajeev Shrivastava/Gou^^ for the petitioners. Heard on admission. I The petitioners have preferr^d this writ petition questjoning •^he legality, propriety and correctn^ss of the oroler dated 4.5.2(X)5 j»asse<i by leanwsd lrt Additional S^ssions Judge, Bitospur whereby tie prayer of the petitioners pommissianer for division of petr^l pump/as mentioned in Item 1^0.4 of ScheduIe-II has been reje^ted. Leamed counsel for the p^titioner's submits that as per ^lecree, Caltex Petrol Pump, which |ias been ^iown as Item No.4 in ^chedule-EE of the plaint <xnd Iter^ No.l in Schedule-B of countBr ^laim, was decidedas a joint fam^ly propert/, therefore, SGwe is for givin9 dtrect-ion to the iable to be part'itioned. Wher^xsJ ^etrol Pump situated at Kathghorc^ ttierefore, -rtie Executin9 Court] ^ommissioner for part-ition of C^xltex Pe-h'ol Pump situated at ^ilaspur. Arguments-advanced by learr^jl Gounsel for the petitioners is xbout the ambiguity in the order] QS per -decree, onother Caltex is not a joint family property, ou9ht to hwe dinBcted the Gnd same is not being passed sonsidering the final decree. In th^ clrcumstances, the petitioners xan move for modification/review 4f the ordfer, if any ambiguity is ^wi^|<tK?)q,tyTTl<<l<|S,^wi1<iy'< *imoi wm^ 3n^^Tq?rRrii<h ^IT^^TaRT^ 31T^9T q^P (yi^q<g) W^200 5^TSf?^TSd 3TT^$T -2--- left out. At this sta9e unless| for the petitioners is clarffi^d maintainable and interferen<te not called for. With the aforesaid, th|e Consequently, M.(W.)Pl stand disposed of. <pi<i[o<nn*iinoT^'fe^^Tf^Ff ^3rf^T3ff^?T the position argued by feamed counsel in the order, the writ petition is not in the order of Executing Court- is petition is disposed of< No.3868/05 <& I.A. No.7934/05 also Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge SP/FS/2005-20,000 \^f AT '^:v