HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISOARH AT BILASPUR W.P43271 No. 6339 Of 2011 PBTITIONBRS PLA!NT!FFS VBRSUS RESPONDBNTS DBPBNDANTS Genda Lal Shrivastava, S/o Late Heera Lal Slirivastva, aged about 67 years, R/o Sapeep Jashpur Road near Barrier Patthalgaon, Tahsil Patthalgaon, District Jashpur(C.G.). Snit. Saraswati Shrivastava, W/o Genda Lal Shrivastava, aged about 58 years, R/o Sapeep Jashpur Road near Bamer Pattha^aon, Tahsil Patfhalgaon, District Jashpzir (C.G.)« Bhushaa Agrawal, S/o Kishaxi Agrawal, aged about 46 years. Anup Agrawal, S/o Kishaa Agrawal, aged about 38 years» Bofh are occupation busiaess, R/o Bazarpara Patfhalgaon, Distt, Jashpur(C.G.}. Ratthu Raia Mouwar, S/o Harihar Smgh Maitri, (dead) Sadanaad, S/o Ratfhu Ram, Bimla, D/o Ratfliu Ram. Kamla D/o Ratfhu Raaa Uina Bai, D/o Ratfhu Ram. Hem Kunwar, D/o Ratfhu Ram. Respondent No, 3(a) to (e) are resident of BUaitangai^ Patfhalgaou, Distfc, Jashpur (C.G.). Uma Bai, D/o Ratthu Ram, R/o Bilaitaagar, Distt. Jashpur. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Collector, Jashpur Nagar (C.G.). WRIT PBTITION UNDBR ARTICLB 227 OP THB CONSTITUTION OP INDIA. (SB :Hoa'ble Mr. T.P.Sharma, J.) Present:- Mr. H.B. Agrawal, Sr. Advocatewith Ms. Meera Jaiswal, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms, Sangeeta Mishra, P.L. for the State/respondent No. 5. Respondents No. 1 to 4 not noticed. ORDBR (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) 1. (Passedon 08/11/2011) By this petition uiider Article 227 of the Constitution of India petitioners have challenged fhe legality and propriely of fhe order dated 25/8/2011 passed by CivU Judge Class-2, Patthalgaon Distdct Jashpur ia civU suit No. 95A/2006 whereby leanied Coiirt ^ .^^ ^^ //"^ l?f I; ^isrfSi^ 1 -^S^ / i ^f,^' "^^stf^ ^l below has disiaissed the application for pemiitdbtig to adduce secondaiy evidence under Section 65 of tlie Evideace Act. Mr. H.B. Agrawal, Sr, Advocate witli Ms. Meera Jaiswal, Advocate for the petitioners & Ms. Sangeeta Mishra, P,L, for tihe State/respondent No. 5 are heard. Order unpugned, copy of the plaint aad copy of the written stateinent perused. As per pleadiag niade ia plaiat and written statenient present petitioners have claim theniselves as tenaiit aad has filed suit for declaration that they wiU declared as tenaat and respondents be debarred from evicting without followiiig procediire prescribed under fhe law. By filiag written stateinent respondents No. 1 to 4 have filed counter claiia in which tliey have claimed fhat plaintiffs/petitioners are tenant aacl have prayed for eviction Le. both the pardes have claimed axid admitted relationship of laadlord aad tenaat therefore by dismissiag appUcation under Section 65 of fhe Evidence Act Coiut below has not committed any Ulegality requtring aay iaterference irx exercise of supervisory jiuisdiction iii terms of under Article 227 of tlie Constitiition of India. Consequently, petition is Uable to be disniissed aiid is hereby dismissed, No order as to costs. 4, I.A, No, 01 is also disraissed, Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge 4- 1