? 5^ ^ COURT OF 4UDJCATURE CHHATTISGARH.: BILASPUR SiNQI-E BENCH : HON'BLE SHRi S.R. NAYAK, CJ. frif Petition No.2825 OF 20 UIUI ;NDANT; Pl AiMT'F 1. M/s Raiaram corn Products (Pb) Pvt. Ltd., Regd, & Head office, 17, Sector 4, Chandigarh 2. Subodh Kumar Gupta, R/o H.No.17, SecSor - 4, Chandigarh Vs. <1 Suryakant gupta, La! bagh, Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh Manindra Shrivastava, iearned Senior Advocate v,'ith Shri Amrito Das iearned Counset forthe petitioners. Mr. P.K.C Tiwari, Searned Senlor AesvocaSe v/ith Shri Avinash K Mishra iearned Counsel for the respondent. -: ST (Passed orr20m Juns 20Q6) "TftereTsa serious dispute befrween She parties with rsgsrd to the question whether M/s Rajaram Cbrn Products (Pb) Pr'ivate Limited is a firm of which..the_men'lb£ts.^ithefamily of-!at& SftFi. Rajaram- Gupta' ara ths partners or it is the so!e proprietorship of the rsspondent piaintiff. Ths respondent hss instituted the suit out of which this writ petltion has arisen in the CiviE Court ciaimsng that he is the soie proprietor of Ws Rajaram with a prayer that share of Rupees Th'trty Lakhs has been issued to the M/s Rajaram Corn Products Private Limited through Shri Subodh Kumar Gupta be canceSled and some of Rs.2,43,577.50 be paid to hlm. The petitioner heresr, having put in appearance and contested the suit pn merit, raised a preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of the suit. T'ne C-ivii Court held th.at She suit is malntalnable. On ths basis of the 1 -1 ( above fsrtding, the Civii Court by the impugned order made on an appiicatlon of the piaintiff rsspondent under Order 38 Rule 5 CPC directed the petitioners herein to furnish the bank guarantse of Rs.21 ,00,000/-. It was contended that ths findins of t'ne Court below that the suit is maintainable Is ex facie untenable and, therefore, even the impugned order directing the pstitionar to furriish' bank guarantea for Rs.21,00,000/- shouia be held as the one without jurisdiction. Thes-s is no nsed for this Court, at this siage, to decide the abovs legal pnnt urged in this Court. The petitloners are entitSed to raise that po'snt in an appeal that rnay be preferred by them in the evsnt of ths triaS Court Judgment and decree going against them. That liberty is reser/ed to thetn. Th®writ petltion is, therefore, dismisssd. The Civi' Court Is dsrecteci to expedlte the triai of the sure. Sd/- ChiefJustice