^ry \^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P. (227) N0^^246/2011 PETITIONER PLAINTIFF RESPONENTS: VERSUS 1. 2. Tushar Kanti Bose, son of Late Rasik Lal Bose, aged about 75 years, R/o Brindavan Colony, Jagdalpur, District Baster (C.G.). Sri K.K. Sadhnand, Son of Krchan Electrical Mechanic, N.M.D.C. Bacheli, Tehsil and District Dantewada (C.G.). State of Chhattisgarh, Through Collector Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. (SB :Hon'ble Mr. T.P.Sharma, J.) Present:- Shri Vishnu Koshta, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Akhil Agrawal, P.L. for the State/respondent No. 2. None for the respondent No. 1, although sen^ed. ORAL- ORDER (Passedon 16/08/2011) 1. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India petitioner has challenged the legality and propriety of the order dated 10/5/2011 passed by 3rd Civil Judge Class-2, Jagdalpur (C.G.) in civil suit No. 16-A/09 whereby 3rd Civil Judge Class-2, Jagdalpur (C.G.) has provided opportunity of filing written statement to the Ludru & Chaitram namely legal representatives of deceased Budru. 2. As per certified copy of the order impugned, present petitioner has filed suit against respondent No. 1 Sri K.K. Sadhnand and State of Chhattisgarh exparty. During pendency of the suit, respondent No. 1 has filed an application for impleading one Budru as apurchaser and defendant but subsequently it comes into knowledge that Budru has died then again respondent No. 1 has Hled an application then application for impleading legal representatives of ^" ^. " "N /^'^ "^ "S^syA'^ 1 -^^^^.-:^ ^ i. 'T" ^y / "., -^./ —^— ^^ Budru namely Ludru & Chaitram vide application dated 26/1/2011. Notice has been issued to them, they made their appearance through counsel on 10/5/2011 and made request that Court has provided time to file written statement. Order-sheet reveals that Court has not permitted to implead Ludru & Chaitram as defendants and they have not been pleaded as defendants therefore, there was no propriety for passing aforesaid order and providing opportunity for filing written statement. It appears that as prayed counsel for the Ludru & Chaitram Court below has provided opportunity of filing reply of the application filed by respondent No. 1 and may be as bonafide mistake it has been recorded as opportunity for filing written statement. Consequently, petition is disposed of with the following directions . alleged Ludru & Chaitram may file reply, application filed on behalf of the respondent No. 1 for impleading them as defendants. Court is required to provide opportunity of defending such application to present petitioner and after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, respondent No. 1, alleged Ludru & Chaitram; Court shall pass the order afresh in accordance with law relating t.o impleading of Ludru & Chaitram as defendants. All interim applications are also dismissed. No order as to costs. T.P. Sharma Judge •^'•-