“’“g‘mgm 3ench AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION No. %%¥O§f’?2 005 Lakshman ao Bapat, son of Shripat Rao Bapat, aged abOut 60 year, resident: of Satti Bazar, Raipur. I 1. Smt. Alka Bapat, wife of Late TAVinash Bapat, aged about 45 ears, resident of Satti Bazar, y Raipur. AshWini Bapat, son of Late Avinash Bapat, aged about 27 years, resident of Satti Bazar, Raipur. Akash Bapat, son of Late Avinash Bapat, aged about 23 years, resent of Satti Bazar, Raipur. State ug of Chhattisgarh, throh the Collector, Raipur. OF THE WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 CONSTITUTION OF INA. DI “ ITIONER: EN . IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGAREC: PETITIONER / R s VS RESPONDENTS / id XI—HC—78 WW,WWW Wl87o3r mm (W3) mam Ran amm mamm WWW‘ WW %aif?mwé¥i 25.1.2605 Shri E2. Shanna, counsei for SmL Fouzia Mil‘za, Panel Law :_ LFhC pctitionsr has pmfm‘rcd Cx/anstitution 0f India questioning th<:' yhb ord€r (mum ._. .11.g004 \Anmix has rdected thc application pmfer; ules 10 8% 1 of PF far re1ecmcn “ms not b66n 13101361“? Vamed and qu LEAmaJ tnal Loult v1d€ i application of the petitioner obse deblaration of right’s not for oartit valued and sufficiemt court fee. haa b i havo hoard loarnod counsel l Learned counsel for the. petitioner submits that reepondent No.1 to o am not in oogsegsion of tho suit property and in fact thev are. soe partition in the garb of daclaration. the court fee for partition of the prop to far the petitioner has not sourt below: therefore. he can rai statement and trial court will frame mine as a preliminary issue. With the above observation, tl‘i Consequently, M.W.P. Noloi 2 Oo & I u ho 41 W005 also stend :iisoosed of. Sd/- L.~C. Bhadoo Judge the petitioner. v€r for the Stato,’ rosoondom No.4‘ lib petition under Aitulc “9” of tho legality, rnpriew cmd coir LtHCSb oi ure P—i} wherebv learned trial court ‘ed bV the oetitioner under Grder 7 of the plaint on the ground that suit ‘fittent court tee t1 tot been paid npugned order regected the said rving that Since the plaint is for ion, therefore, it has been properly ‘aen oaicl. t or the partios‘ Ktng Therefore. thev ought to have maid l erty in question led hie written statement before the the aforesaid point m the written he iesue on this; point and decide the petition stands disposed of, s WW W 200 s i