G- s'^ f^^ ^ P^j^ll |fi^L^ ^I-8^6i IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH WRITPETITION N0. r^&^ OF 2006 PETITIONERS DEFENDANTS .'R J/^/~ . .•"'-M?' /^ 's^f Sn/ ,s? ^*' ./ 1. Purshottam Puri S/o Bhuvneshwar Puri, aged about 50 years. 2. Khageshwar Puri S/o Bhuvneshwar Puri, aged about 44 years. 3. Tirathmati Wd/o Mohan aged about 82 years , by caste Mowar. All resident of Mahadevpali, Tahsil Dabhra, District Janjgir Champa (CG). 4. Bahartin Bai Wd/o Bhuvneshwarpuri , aged about 75 years, resident of Village Mahadevpali, Tahsil Dabhra, District Janjgir Champa (CG). 5. Lata Bai D/o Bhuneshwarpuri W/o Satyanandpuri, aged 50 years, resident of Mahadevpali, Tahsil Dabhra, District Janjgir Champa , at present residing at Village Kesla ,Tahsil Gharghoda District Raigarh (CG). The Petitioner no. 4 and 5 are the legal heirs of late Bhuvneshwarpuri . VERSUS RESPONDENTS: Gandapuri S/o Danaipuri, (Died) Legal Heirs l(a). Khemrajpuri S/o (jandapuri, aged about 42 years . (b). Harishankerpuri S/o Gandapuri, aged about 36 years . (c) Digamberpuri S/o Gandapuri, aged about 28 years . (d) Radha Bai D/o Gandapuri, aged about 45 years . (e) Gouri Bai D/o Gandapuri, aged about 36 years . "s"3 (e) Jamuna Bai D/o Gandapuri, aged aoout 34 years. All resident of Village Mahadevpali, Tahsil Dabhra, District Janjgir Champa (CG). ^ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF •WR£L_OR WR1TS,_ORDER OR ORDERS, DIRECT!QN_ OR DIRECTIQNS_ UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE XI-HC-22 -g^ ^qT;iRTq,.-^gt?fTre. W "Sff^T \ ^f/JO,^^ "^ '2W t, sn^r^ f<-i 31ISSI **<!<* 'Hfi^i 105.05.2006 SII^I ^RIIWBfttT Smt. Mala Dubey, counsel None for respondents. Heard on admission and M.W.I Respondents are legal pandapuri instituted a civil suit] ^ettnaaent injuiiction against tdso filed an appUcation for grant o]l prier 39 rule 1 & 2 ofthe Code |rejected by trial Court and in ap|pe favour of respondents has been [Judge in Misc. Civil Appeal No. ^ggrieved by fhe order of First Ipetition under Section 227 of fhe ^referred by the petitioneraj Learaed appeBate Court afifer ^evenue records and material on reil; Ittie owner of suit laad Khasra No. |are also in possession of it 'petitioneis/defendaats are difFerentj It is evident fhat according to| lin'posSession ofttie rcspondents |laad. To support title and ppssessi^n, fi»r|thepetitioners. i/defenda^its WlitO ^i^^4li ^W^ff ^ f^T3t <^^.1< '^Slf'BH 311^1 .|P. No. 1555/2006. re^resentatives of Gandapuri. for declaratiou of title aad lutraieshwarpuri and others aud o]F temporary iaiimction, uuder bf Civil Procedure. That was iplpeal, temporaiy uyunction. in by Pirst Additk>nal District 11/1999 on 8.4.1999. Being District Judge, Sakti, ttus Constitution of India has been Bhutraieshwarpuri iplpeal, alloived Additlonal whrfreas due coiisideration of the •ord held fhat respondents are L0/l (kha) area 3.26 acres who the land purchased by fherefore, aUowed the appeal. khasra, the suit land is shown are Bhoomiswami of fhe siut , affidavit has also been filed -t- y^ XI-HC-22 T5 ^si •^i^ici<i, ^i"ra"s. l^roy W'I!1^^? . / '^1..^^- ^0^ "^ 200 ^ ^ sn^rqiT 'fewsn^; aTHW.Hfspf ai^T'^gTWaftti •2- - ^N?Fih iwRff 4-fe^ ^rezrc ^'3:rfi(PT3n^[ <<v Kvr rei> by fhe respondents aad that| was not controverted by ffae peti.ti.oners/defendants. Prima f^de, suit laud is in possession pf the respondents, fherefore.tljteu' dispossession, may cause irreparabte loss to them, as sijich the principles of balance of couveniencp aud irreparable lo^s lie iu their favoiir. Learaed appeUate Court did not commit any iUegaUty, which may caU for any mterference by fhis Court. |Accordmgly, fh.e Writ Petition No. 2058/2006 and M.W.P. No. 155^/2006 are dismissed,^^ Sd/- V.K.Shrivastava Judge [^'?fi^