IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CIVIL REVISION N0^4 9( /2010 c^ PETITIONER/ fON APPLICANT DEFENDANT c^fei^ ^ss Vx^' t. •' ^-:y ^ ^*••" RESPONDENTS/ APPLICANTS / PLAINTIFF Guruwari W/o. Ramji, aged about : 45 years, R/o. Village : Paladi, Tahsil : Jaijaipur, District : Janjgir- Champa (C.G.). VERSUS ^t] Dashrath S/o. Ranjit (Dead) 1[A>- Kaushal Prasad S/o. Late Dashrath, aged about : 53 years, 1[B] Keshav Prasad S/o. Late Dashrath, aged about : 51 years, 1K:] Madan Lal S/o. Late Dashrath Prasad, aged about : 48 years, l[Qj Arun Kumar S/o. Late Dashrath Prasad, aged about : 46 years, ^^%^^i ^. 1[E] Rishabh Kumar S/o. Late Dashrath Prasad, aged about : 44 years, fUX a7^-. ^/°__'^-J;^<-~-^a<k^ -fSMi'^'^flU^ 9e£H• ^wgsivfhW^p'i. State of Chhattisgarh : Through : Collector, Janjgir, District : Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). ^ CIVIL REVISION UNDER SECTION 115 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDAJRE CODE ff ^ -f- XI-HG—78 sv^sv R-fi<* wnsn^i ibt(i<* -.2' '3^! •^l|4||<r)<4, ®flly|ia,fs)c1l'!-iy,-!. "W^IT •g^ra?->u^*~s;--''''"-^a;-"----^ 200 STI^I T p (^q^q) 'swiw^g sf^y y.B. Hon'ble Shri Ju$ttce1^K: ^>N?rih tfftRff-i!-feiA Tte?R ^affin aili?! Auaiwa!—- 09.04.2010 Shri Pushpendra Kumar Heard on admission. The instant revision is di i.2010 passed by the Addil Janjgir Champa, in Misc. Civi! whereunder the court below application under Order 41 Rulej caused in fiting the said applicati The brief facts of the casel An appeal preferred by Vs court below after proceeding exf Later on, the non applica^ the appeal under Order 41 application for condoning delay The tria! court, upon re^ appeal was not duly served up4 applications and fixed the appe;| 1 have heard the counsel jserused the order impugned. P^tel, Advocate for appiicant. jrected against the order dated fonal District Judge, Sakti, Distt. ^ase No. 17/1999, whereby and h^s attowed the non applicant's 21 of CPC condoning the delay t>n. lare that: ^e applicant was allowed by the :F|arty against the non applicant. ^t No. 1 applied for re-hearing of ffule 21 of CPC, also filed an filing aforesaid application. ;ording a finding that notice of ^n the non applicant, allowed the Tor re-hearing. appearing for the applicant and Undisputedly, there was jio due service of summons upon the non applicant No. 1, In vi^w of above, the court below has XI-HG—78 ^s? '^i'4iti'Li, (Stilyito, fsitfiyy *ii*i^fth*n^ Wl 200 3^ •VW C^qt^^q) OT^T W K-liti n2TT '3TT^5T sh*i WITW ^fttl 31T^( ngntiy aiiowed the non app Sahu of the appeal after condonin^ apptications. Right of hearing a| substantive right of a party as unheard. the delay in filing the said alfter due service of summons is no party can be condemned For the forgoing, the revis liable to be and is hereby dismiss cniAi(ci'iftTi MI^^l' tf fs^ 'd^I<:?T< ^STRpisn^ii lcaiil's appliuatiuii for re-hearing |on being devoid of substance is ied. No order as to costs. Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge