a4 WLA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (Artzzn No. é ( OF 2011 PETITIONERS (Anand Kumar‘ Lohiya, son of (P‘GiMiffS) Shr‘i K.M. Maheshwar‘i, aged 34 years, Occupa'rion— Business, residen’r of Near ‘ Kama! Talkies, Bhar‘kapara, : {3“ Rajnandgaon (CG) m ZfSanjay Sharma, son of Shri § Sa‘ryanar‘ayan Sharma, aged 38 year's, Occupa'rion— Business, residen‘r of Near ,BNC Mill Colony, Rajnandgaon “4%fwq/0“ (CG) 0o$g;§\(‘\4\\\ 3./Durendr'a, son of Shri Kamal ‘ v Narfayan Sahu, aged 3O years, OccupaTion—Business, residenf of Vijay Medical Stores, Basan’rpur, Rajnandgaon (CG) Vs RESPONDENTS ('Jeevandeep Sociefy, (Defendanfs) Through iTs Presidenf & Collecfor, Jeevandeep Sociefy, DisTr'icT HospiTal, Rajnandgaon (C6) [é Jeevandeep Society, Through iTs Secre’rary & Superinfendem‘, Disfricf Hospiful (CS), Rcjnandgaon 3. Red Cross Sociefy, through i'rs Presiden‘r & Collecfor‘, Rujnundgaon (CG) PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA zgAgg A A HIGH COURT OF cm-IATTISGARH AT BILASPUR- W.P. (227) No. 65/2011 PETITIONERS Anand Kumar Lohiya and others Versus RESPONDEI‘ITS Jeevandeep Society and othels SB:-‘ HON’BLE SHRI N.K. AGARWAL, J PRESENT :- Shri Malay Shrivastava, Advocate, for the petitioners. Shri M.P.S. Bhatia, Advocate for the respondents. ORAL ORDER (21-1-2011) The matterjs heard. 2. During the course of argument, learned counsel for both the parties are agreed that since the order passed by the trial court was en‘ective only upto 29- 1-2011 which has been set aside by the hrst appellate court vide order impugned, therefore, the trial court has to pass fresh order after a period of 29—1-201 1. In View of the above, no purpose would be served in hearing this petition finally and it would be appropriate to direct the trial court that if the plaintih‘s/petitioners herein file an application afresh for temporary injunction, then it shall hear the same on its own merits without being influenced by any observation made by the trial court or the first appellate court on merits and till 29- 1-2011, the order of first appellate court shall not take eh‘ect. 3. The prayer is reasonable. Therefore, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the trial court that if the plaintiffs/petitioners file an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of C.P.C. for gant of temporary injunction, then the trial court shall decide the same on its own merits without being influenced by any observation made ' by the trial court or the first appellate court and till 29-1— 20 1 1, the order impugied shall not be en‘ectig w Sdl— me Ag‘a‘va‘ Juége ’u/ /