IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CIVIL REVISION N0. t^j of 2003^ RAMESH CHAND AHIR, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS SON OF SHIR HIRA SINGH AHIR. ^ ^.^^S^ SMT. JANKI BAI AHIR, WIFE T:^^^^' ^*' ......^i??' »-.^"^-XSs.--'' OF SHRI RAMESH CHAND AHIR BOTH RESIDENTS OF GOLEBAZAR,RAIPUR «^ PETITIONERS /PLAINTIFFS ^ ^' YERSUS NILESH KUMAR SON OF SHRI MANUBHAI RESIDENT OF DURG, TEHSIL & DISTT. DURG 2. BHIKU BHAI SON OF SHRI ESHWAR BHAI RESIDENT OF DURG, TEHSIL & DISTT. DURG (C.G.) MANIK BHAI SON OF UNKNOWN RESIDENT OF GOLE BAZAR, SHOP N0. 407, WARD N0.24, RAIPUR TAHSIL & DISTT. RAIPUR. 3. RESPONDENTS / DEFENDANTS \-^'- REVISIONPETITIONUNDERSECTION1150F CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 €'- XI-HC-22 '^ ^I^^TTaWTW 3TI^T^T I^TT^^n^T N?^cf Sh^l<=b^T s. )!v]. .—-.. ^ ^ ^ „< ^ 3T(^w ^-^ r^NM^, ^^^(0, Rtdiy^< ^T^sich ^:^(^/^. ^ 200 Ri<)<4 ?^rrw^rf?cT 10.03.2005:- •Shri B.P.Sharma. Seamedcoi The Instant civl! revision Is 28.03.2003 by M.C.A.No.08/2002 and by which rejection of his application fbr the Court below, was rejected. dlrected agalnst the "smpugned order Distric-t Judge, Ralpur (C.G.) in t|ie appeai Qfthe:appjjcant against the man^aton/ temporary injunction fiied before I:eamed counsel for the ap^licants revision with iibei+y to file apprQpri^ as tn©sam^ is not maintainabie in 115 6f tho Code of Civii Prooedut Court reported m {2003) ^^j^/w ^Gletv, Vs. cbl^fa41^ ^l^lclt ^te^tRi^K ^3^TT3n^T Insel for the appllcants. to withdraw the instant ite proceedlngs under the law ^iew of th©amended proviso to S^ction ae and the iaw laid down by the Apex jn the matter of_&^iy,S/%AfL_^^a as 'wejj ^ as in the.case of Vs. in 6. 675. Accordjngly, the revjsjon p^titlon is dlsmissed as not majntainable fof. Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge (.^^f^)