IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR 117’ Writ Petition No. / ‘7 7 of 2009 . .... PETITIONER / Chhattisgarh State Warehousing Corporation, Branch Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon, through its Branch Manager, Chhattisgarh State Warehousing Corporation, Branch Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG). Versus RESPONDENTS /1. Savita Bai, W/o Late Mahesh Kumar, aged about 31 years, R/o Thana Chowk, Dongargarh, Tehsil Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon (CG). (2r Ashutosh, S/o Late ‘Mahesh Kumar, aged about 13 years, through natural guardian Savita Bai. ,, 3. Sunil Kumar, S/o Late Mahesh Kumar, aged about 11 years, through natural guardian Savita Bai. Respondents No.1 to 3 are resident of Thana Chowk, Dongargarh, Tehsil Dongargarh, [/7 riDistrict Rajnandgaon (CG). ('4. Manoj Agrawal, S/o Laxmi Narayan Agrawal, Occupation Business, R/o Khandupara, Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon (CG). ‘15. Smt‘. Rita Agrawal, W/o Shri Manoj Agrawal, R/o Khandupara, Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon (CG). ?Jr / 6. Chhattisgarh State Marketing Federation Limited, through District Marketing Officer, Chhattisgarh State Marketing Federation Limited, Rajnandgaon (CG). Commissioner under Workmen’s Compensation Act, Rajnandgaon (CG). 17. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (227) NO.197 OF 2009 PETITIONER Chhattisgarh State Warehousing Corporation Versus Savita Bai & Others RESPONDENTS (Writ petition under Article 227 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon‘ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present :- Shri B.D. Guru, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Parag Kotecha, Advocate for the respondents No.1 to 3. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 29m day of June, 2010) 1. By this petition, the petitioner impugns the order dated 6-11—2008 (Annexure — P/1) whereby the application of the petitioner filed’under Order 9 Rule 13 ofthe Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to set aside the order proceeding ex parte against the petitioner was dismissed. There was no interim order granted by this Court during pendency of the petition. The case has finally been decided on 20—6—2008 (Annexure — R1/1) in favour of the respondents No.1 to 3 herein. Being aggrieved, according to the learned counsel appearing for the respondents No.1 to 3, an appeal has been preferred by the Chhattisgarh State Marketing Federation Limited before this Court being MA. (C) No.633 of 2009, which is pending consideration. In view of the subsequent developments during pendency of the petition as aforestated this petition has become infructuous, as even the petitioner succeeds in the petition, no relief can be granted to re-open the case, which hasvalready been finally decided by order dated 20-6—2008. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. il II Satish K. Agnihotri ll ii Sd/- l Judge Gowr i