BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATnSGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION U/A 227 No. \\°_^_ 7 2011 PETXTIONERS: ^' .\\/,^- ,ftyfy ..••' ,/v-/ov<-""v./' ^>'^?^<?-y ^^c^y o''..--''^'->^-- ^s>/" -,^ ^•' .^"^y ^ 1. Kedar, s/o Late Motiram Sahu, Aged about 55 years, R/o Village Sararidih, Tehsil Tilda, District- Raipur, (C.G.) (Defendant No. 7) ^Z. Smt. Malti, W/o Shri Nanku Sahu, Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Village Amodi, Tehsil Arang, District- Raipur(C.G.) (Defendant No. 8) ,.3. Smt. Shanti Bai, W/oShri Chowaram, Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Village Chandeli, Tehsil Simga, District- Raipur (C.G.) (Defendant No. 9) V 1 ?»; m: m VERSUS RESPONDENTS: ^- 1 ^\. Smt. Bhawantin Bai, W/o Shri Manrakhan Sahu, Occupation nothing , R/o Village Ranisagar, TehsilArang, District- Raipur (C.G.) (Plaintiff) x1. Daman Lal, S/o Late Sukhiram, (Defendant No. 1) "3. Dighuram, S/o Late Sukhiram, (Defendant No. 2) 4. Sitaram S/o Late Sukhiram, Occupation Agricultyrist, Respondent No. 2 to 4 all R/o Village Saklor, P.0. Saklor, Ub-Tehsil Suhela, Tehsil simga District- Raipur (C.G.) -; (Defendant No. 3) s. '^, s^:^ ss^ III, S:'®--£:'-"^.tuJ.L*-.^N ^ 5,. Smt. Dhanbai, W/o Khilawan, Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Village Hirmi, Ub- Tehsil Suhela, Tehsil Simga, District- Raipur (C.G.) (Defendant No. 4) /^6. Smt. Ramkunwar, W/o Not Known, Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Village Saklor, Ub Tehsil Suhela, Tehsil Simga, District- Raipur (C.G.) (Defendant No. 5) ^7. Smt. Dularibai W/o Not Known, Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Village Sarponga, Tehsil Tilda, District- Raipur (C.G.) (Defendant No. 6) /8. Smt. Geeta Bai, Wd/o Late Ramji Sahu, Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Village Saiha, Post - Gram Champa, Tehsil Balodabazar District- Raipur (C.G.) (Defendant No. 10) ,9. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Collector, Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) (Defendant No. 11) WRIT PETITIONUNDER ARTXCLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OFINDIA. The petitioners named above respectfully submit the particulars of the petition as under :- 1. PARTICULARS^)F THE^ETITIQNER: 9 11 ' :SK 'im?' iB '.^i. As statedin the cause title above. 2. PARTICULARSOF THE RESPONDENTS: As stated in the cause title above. 3. PARTICULARS OF THE ORDER AGAINST WHICH THIS PETITIONjrS MADE. m a -»KI Jgi 18sw. •M T%S~^n HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILA8PUR Writ Petition (227) No. 1 100 of2011 PETITIONERS Kedar & others VERSUS RESPONDENTS : Smt. Bhawantin Bai & others WRTT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTTTUTION OF INDIA (SB: Hon'ble Mr. N.K. Aearwal, J.) Present : Shri Satyendra Sahu, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Vinod Tekam, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORAL ORDER (Passedon 25.02.2011) 1. Legality and propriety oforder dated 06.12.2010, passed by the DCth Additional District Judge (FTC), Raipur, in Civil SuitNo. 2-A/10, whereby the petitioner' application filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC has been dismissed, is under assail in the instant petition. 2. The petitioners have admitted the contents ofpara 7 ofplaint in their written statement. Now, by way of amendment application they want to withdraw the above admission. In the amendment application neither any reason has been shown nor any explanation for withdrawal ofsaid admission has been assigned. 3. In view of above, I do not find any illegality or irregularily in the order passed by the trial court warranting interference oflfais court underArticle 227 ofthe Constitution oflndia. 4. It is well settled principle of law that this Court, in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of ? India, should refrain itself from interfering with the order passed by the Court below, except in such cases where perversity, illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional error is writ large on tiie face of the record, which is not in the present case. The petition has no merit and 1fae same is aecordingly dismissed in limine. ;^"1' "3SS: isiSi^MIg'l'Ni^ .BB^S»?IIF; N