» ^vl\ S tfJB^k. 1 ':""aaii i Y^^j UILTHB^HIOH^OURT OP CHHATnSGARH : BILASPUR Wnt Petition (Cl No. 4682 of2007 Petitioncrs/ Defendants 1. 2. 3. 4. Rcspoadeat/ Plaiatiff Veisus 1. Rcspondent/ Defendant 2. Viaod Kuaaar Agrawal, son of Ghaashyam Agrawal, ayd. about 32 years. Maaoj Kumar Agrawal, S/o Ghanshyaia Agrawal, ayeS. about 30 years. Kiran Bai, S/o. Gtoashyam Agrawal, aged atoout 28 years. Geeta Devi, W/o Ghaashyaiu Agrawal, aged about 50 years. AU Residents of ViHage Cbaanpa, TahsU Chainpa, District Jaujgir- Champa (C.G.) Marwadi Scwa Sangh, Vai-anashi, Throiigh : Special Power of Attomey Giajanand Kedya, ^o Late Basaatlal Kedya, agcd about 62 years, R/o ViBage Alcaltara, Tahsfl Janjgir, District Janjgir-Chaaa.pa (C.G.), Special Power of Attoraey : Through : Nandkishore Sutonya, PmrihnnTnnntri Shri MaTWadi Sewa Sai^h Varanastu, B-2/262 Fadeiu Varanashl, Registered Charitable Sanstha, Varanashi. State of CUiattisgarh, TIuoi^h the Collector, Janjgir, Distnct Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) WRIT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (SB: HonTile ShriSatisfa K. AgaihotriJ.) Shri Raghvendra Pradhaa, Advocate for llie petitioners. Stari Awadh Tripafhi, Advocate for the respondent No. l. Sbri M. P. S. Bhatia, Depuly Govt Advocate for (tic respoitdemt No.2. ORDER (Passcd on tbis 2nd Day ofDecembcr, 2008) 1. The petitioners, by this petition ctaaBenges legdity aad vaUxlity ofthe otderdated 7.7.2007 (P/l), passed m Misc. CwUAppMl ^"^•3!i'.?SS&~.. ^ '^g^S'§?^,. 3 "ssssS!, s ~%9 i Vt»^y "^.K.SSiE^1' (3^ No. 7/2007 (Marwadi Seva Sangfa Vs. Vinod Kuinar Agarwal & others). The brief facts, ia nutshell, necessaiy for disposal of this petition axc that the respondent No.l (Marwadi Seva Saugfa) has ffled a CivU Suit No.58-A/2006 for declaration of tttte aad uyunction In respect of the siiit property, bearu^ Khasra No. 2314, situated on Birra road, ncar Cham.pa raQway station. During fhe pendency of the sult the plaintiff flled au application under Order 39 Rute 1 aad 2 of the Code of Cwil Procedure, for grant of teiupoiary iajunction, which was dismMsed by leamed First Civfl Judge Class-Il, Janjgir vide order dated 13.3.2007 (Annexure P/6). Thereafter, the respondent No.l filed Miscellaneous Civfl Appeal No. 7/2007, chaHengu^ the ordcr dated 13.3.2007. Learaed District Judge, Janjgir Ctoaxapa by iinpugaed order dated 7.7.2007, aUoiwcd the appcal and dicected that both the parties stiaU not alicBate and claaays the iiature of the property till the disposal of the pendiag civil suit or until furfher orders. Bemg aggrieved by the order dated 7.7.2007 the petitioners have filed this petttion. Leamed coumsel appeanng for the petitioDers subnaits that the name of tfae petitioners Iias been mutated ia reveniie records and they are in possession of the siut property, theisfore fhe tnterim injunction is not sustaiaabte. I have heard teamed coim.scl appeaiing for thc petitfoner, perused the pleadit^s aad dociuncnts appended theicto. I do not fiad aay uregularily or iufiniuly or Jurisdicttoaal crror iu the impugtted order, whcrein the leaaaed court bdow has ^!!^i^^' 7. 8. directed that fhe siiit property shaU not be atienated and nature of thc property shaU not be changed till ttic disposal of the suit or until fiuther orders. No piejudice is going to be caused to siny of the parties, if the status quo of the siiit property is xuaintained tiU the disposal of fhe suifc It is weU-iugh estabUshed that ttus Court in exercfae of its supemsoiy jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitufen of India shoiild refiaia itselt' fiwm intertering witfa the order passed by fhc Courts below, except ia such cases wheie perversily, illegaUly, irreguladty or jurisdictional error is writ large on the feice of ttie record, which is uot ia the preaent case. In view of the foregoiag and for thc reasoas mcntioaed heremabovc, there is no inerit ta this petition atid thc saiae is dismissed at m.0tion sts^. Tlidan Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge