1N THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR(C.G.) WRIT PETITION(227) No. gm? OF 2009 $Mgie Benah / PETITIONER.................................. Smt. Urmila Pandey Age About PLAINTIFF 42 Years W/o JaideV Pandey R/o Sheetla Para Bhatapara, At Present resident of Lodhipara Kanpa Raipur Tah and District Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS _ 1 RESPONDENT ........................ 1. dagdish pandey Age about 44 DEFENDANT Years, S/o Siyaram Pandey, R/o Panchavati Nagar Mowa / Raipur, (C.G.) 2. Smt. Shantidevi Pandey, Age About 62 Years W/o Jairam Pandey, R/o Aadersh chowk Panchvati Mowa Tah.and District Raipur(C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER URTICALE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IGH ‘COU‘RT OF CHHATTISGARH ATLBILASPUR H Single Bench ' V Hdn’ble Shri Prashant Kumai’ Mis‘hra, J. ' Writ Petition (227) No 3167 of 2009 Writ Petition underArticle 227 of‘the Constitution of India Present: Shn Rakesh Thakur counsel’forthe petitioner ' ‘ Shri Yogesh Pandey, counsel for the respondents _ o R DE R (9* February, 2010) - The petitioner / plaintiff is aggrieved by the order dated 22 04 2009 passed by 11‘“ Additional District Judge, Raipur in“ Miscellaneous Appeal No 4/2008 2) The petitioner / plaintiff has preferred a suit for declaration and permanent injunction wrth regard to the lands bearing Khasra No 638 area 099 hectares however the defendants have started raismg construction on a part of the said lands causrng inconvenience to the plaintiff to use her own lands The plaintiff ‘ also prayed for a temporary injunction to restrain the defendants ’ ,from raismg constructron. The trial Courtyby an order dated 11.12.2007 had issuedtemporary injunction in favour of the plaintiff, however, by the appellate order dated 22.04.2009 z r Petitioner ’ Smt Urmila Pandey Plaintiff ‘ ' Versus Respbndents ' 7 Jagdish Pandey and another Defendants J; ;A g 2&80‘ (Annexure‘ P18), the appellate Court has allowed the, appeal preferred by the respondents I defendants and has thus vacated the temporary Injunction granted by the trial Court in favour of the 7 petrtroner/ plamtrff. 3) The suit was flied on or about 21.06.2004. It is common ground that the suit has reached the stage of recording evidence ofthe parties as the issues have already been framed by the trial Court. 4) / 'ln this view of the matter, this Court directs that; the suit preferred by the plaintiff shall be disposed of as early as possible, preferably within a period of eight months,’ from the date of receipt of a copy of this order lt Is also made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter and also that the observations made by the First Appellate Court while deciding the respondents appeal under Order XLlll Rule 1 (r) of Code of CIVII Procedure were only for the limited purpose of decrding the application for grant of temporary, Injunctlon and‘that the decision of the suit shall ultimately be made on the:6asis of the pleadings raised and the ieVidence , adduced by the parties in the course of trial of the suit. 5) With this observation, the presentwata‘petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is disposed of. {i subbu Sd/- t’j Pr'ashant Kumar Mishrai‘ 7 ‘ i ’ Judge