/y'h ^\ r l§!fe?-®a»,.1 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (Art. 227) No.692 of 2010 PETITIONER/: (DefendantNo.1) RESPONDENTS/: (Plaintiff) Bhulin Bai D/o Malik Ram, aged about 60 years, R/o Village Kuan, Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) Versus Smt. Annapurna Sharma D/o Late Sidhdaram Mishra, Wife of Omprakash Sharma, aged about 40 years, R/o Village Kuan, Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.). 2. The State of Chhattisgarh, through Collector, Bilaspur (C.G.). (Defendant No.2) {Writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India} Present: Mr. Malay Kumar Bhaduri, counsel for the petitioner. None for respondent No.1 though served. Miss Sangeeta Mishra, Panel Lawyerforthe State/respondent No.2. Sinale Bench: Hon'ble Mr. T.P. Sharma. J ORDER (28-9-2011) 1. By this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged legality and propriety of the order dated 14-1-2010 passed by the 2 Additional District Judge, Bilaspur in Misc. Civil Appeal No.44/2009, whereby the Court below has allowed the applications filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC for taking documents on record and under Section 151 of the CPC for admitting the document on record. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the order impugned and copies of other documents. 3. By passing the order impugned, virtually, the Court below has taken the documents on record and has admitted the documents on record, but by passing such orderthese documents have not been admitted in evidence in terms of Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC as additional evidence. In these clccumstances, by simply admitting the documents on record i.e. not taking the documents in evidence, the Court below has not committed any illegality. 4. Consequently, the petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observation. No order as to costs. __„_—; Sd/- ;~~~~~: T.P. Sharma Judge