dUa "SCIRH ^:^'^^ l~ P^-E- ^.^e'" IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILAS PUR WRIT PETITION N0.4-5C4/2005. PETITIONER : DEFENDANT JUDGEMENT DEBTOR ^ e'^'^y ^ ;...•' / ^•^,-' / ' :<<y ^' RESPONDENT : PLAINTIFF DECREE HOLDER M/s. Surjeet Singh & Sons Proprietor, Surjeet Singh, S/o Bhagat Singh, aged about65 years. R/o. Bardebhata, Tahsil and Distt. Kanker (C.G.) at present Ramnagar, Tahsil and Distt. Kanker (C.G.) VERSUS '' State Bank of India, Through : The Branch Manager Kanker, Distt. Kanker (C.G.) WRIT_PETLTLQN_U.NDER ART1CLE 226/227 OF THE CONST(TUTIQN_QFJNDIA, | | ]| XI-HC-78 1I«1<>>I^TT?? \jCT|-til«irt^i,u>-a|tt<i<»,Rdl'<4^'{ L^>(7 |V&.tii:o^|By sn^sTiR^ (cprfgsi%) ant?rwR')i4> (RIT3n^?Tri)*ficb ^^^? •••w'^y ^-..—..^.-^'^^-h-'' •^-'—^^"-'i;'' swiTSR^fiasn^sT 21.9.2006 Shri Ramesh Kumar 5harmo, CBI Heard on admission. The peti+ioner hns pfeferreci Csns+i+ution of India ques+ionihg •i'hi crdw dsted Z.a.ZOQS (^nnsxurs P- •Tudae, Kanker has rejeeted -t+ie appi Opslep 21-Ruis 40 rsad with Seetisn l' X hsve psrused •ttis impugnsQ w It hes been mentioned in the not paid the decretai aB!Oun+ and exi appiiea+ion is rejeeted. It has fur+hi s.'as passed to ssnd the petitioner in ci Counse! fer 1+re pctitioner Rs.°5,000/- a>as paasssd against t petitloner hos paid Rs.S^pOO/-. E^ petitioner is seeepted then also mon pstitiQner <s not psying sai^ Qmeu^t t^ Counse! for the petitloner hab irr'egulai'ity In The order of the Ex| ground to inter-fers with the impugn4d ^sywssed and it l,a acco!rldsn9iy, disniis^sd. Consequsntiy, M.(V]/.)P. No.f dismissed. |ihis pe+ition under I'trticie 226/2Z7 of The i©9Gii'h'> proprie'Ly "n^ coppeetness of ^s (1) whsreby iearned 1 Additionai bistricT (catien filed by the petitioner herein under |t of -riie CPC. 1-der. tpi<it»<l1iiiiosl'^'fai^l •(RJIWI'; ^3l)^»f3II^?T tnsel for •the petitioner. cution \s pending ^ince 1995, t^ersfQps, the been mentioneci that sn 12.9.2003 an ordei- |/ii jaii. submitted that a deci-ee n the tune of se psti+i&nep hersis &nd tha"sQft&", ths sn if the contention of counsel for -tfie •Aan Rg.79,aX3/- is stili outstandmg aFid the not besn abie to point out any iliegaiity or cutlng Cou"t, Thersfore, I do not find any 3 order. As sueh,the petitien 'is liabie to be 654/OS a I.n._ No.8084/05 aiso stand Sd/- l-.C. Bhadoo