IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR w.P. (227). No. ( W30 /2011 l WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA / PETITIONER : Fatima Begam wife of Sikandar (Defendant) Khan, aged 60 years, R/o. Lalpur, Bagbahara, Tahsil and District Mahasamund (C.G.), VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. Idrish, Son of late Ibrahim Khan, aged about 50 years, 2. Shabbir, aged about 47 years, Son of late Ibrahim Khan, R/o. Udiya Para, Beside Dr. Kosariya, Main Road, Saraipali, Tahsil Saraipali, District Mahasarnund (C.G.), 3. Hanif, aged 45 years, Son of late Ibrahim Khan, 4. Wahid, aged about 43 years, Son of late Ibrahim Khan Respondent No.1, 3 8L 4 are R/o. House No. D.N.C., 3-A, 282, S.F.-1, Area, Awla Fariya, Nanidaman, Kharawad, Nanidarnan (Kharawad Para) Tahsil Badidaman (Moti Daman) ( U/T Daman), Post Darnan, PIN — 396210. ‘ HlGi‘i COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (227} N0. 1430 OF 2011 PETETIONER/ : Fatima Begam \ (Defendant) ' Versus RE$PONDE£NTS : IdriSh and others‘ WRIT PETITION UNDER gRTIQLE 227 OF IHE CONSTITUTIQN OF INDI (Sinqle Bench: Han'bie Shri N.K. Aqarwah J4 Present :>Shri Firoj Khan, counsel for the petitianer. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 16m day of March, 2011) Heard. &) 2. Thevinstant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of I India cans in question the Iegaiity and propriety of the order dated 21—02-2011 passed by First Additionai Sessions Judge, Mahasamund in Civii Suit No. 22-A/2003. 3. The facts of the case in brief are as under: On objection raised bythe petitioner herein, the iriei Court framed preliminary issue ‘Whe’rher the judgment and decree dated 09-12u2000 passed in Civii Suit N0.33—A/98 operates as resjudicaz‘a in the instant suit. The triai Court after recording ’ factual finding: matter in issue in the instant suit was not directiy and substantiaiiy in issue in a former suit between the same parties, decided the preliminary issue against thepetitioner. 4. The petitioner failed to'po’int out any finding recorded on an issue framed in the former suit which is directiy and substantiaiiy in issue in the present suit. in view of the above, i do not find any substance in the petition warranting interference of this Court under Articie 227 of the Constitution of india. a ,i I “\o B) 5.. it is we“ settled principle of law that this Court, in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Articie 227 of the Constitution of india, shouid refrain itself from interfering with the order passed by the Court below, except in such oases where perversity, illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional error is writ large on the face of the record, which is not in the present case. 6. Accordingly, the petition being devoid of substance is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge