K ,; E IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.(227)-No. §¢\$b /2010 (8.3.) 3mm mm PETITIONERS / DEFENDANTS l. Khorbahrin Bai, D/o Late Makhan Sahu, aged about 38 years. 2. Ghanaram Sahu, S/o Shiv Lal, aged about 23 years. Both are residents of Dulray chowk, Village Anjora, Tahsil and Distt. Durg(C.G.) VERSUS :1“ Khorbahra Sahu, S/o Late Makhan Sahu, aged about 60 years. ’Rameshwar Sahu, S/o Late Makhan Sahu, aged about 58 years. Both are residents of Village Anjora, P.C. No. 75/62 Tahsil and Distt. Durg(C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh Through — Collector, Durg Distt. Durg (C.G.) 4. Sub Divisional Officer, Durg, Tahsil Office, Durg Distt. Durg (C.G.) RESPONDENTS/ PLAINTIFFS Defendant No. 3 3. Defendant No. 4 . WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE I CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ‘ FE ; ® "‘- (:3; fl7 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR S.B: Hon’ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra W.P. $222) No. 5933/2010 Khorbahrin Bai ami another PETITIONERS Vel'Sus Khorbahra Sahu and others RESPONDENTS Agpearance: Shm' CR. Sahu, counsel for the petitioncrs. Shri Vinod Tekam, Panel Lawyer for the State. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE ONSTITUTION OF INDIA W ORAL ORDER (18.10.2010) Heard. (2) The trial court has closed the petitioners/defendants right t0 flle e of four years written the petitioners/defendants have not filed their written‘statement. statement after observing that even after laps /. r, {3) Learned counsel for the petitioners refers to the order sheet of the trial court recorded on 14/07/2006 to submit that the petitioners e already submitted their written statement (4) On perusal of the order sheet the submission made by learned on the said date. hav counsel appears to be correct. sed of '(5) In View of the above, the instant writ petition is dispo with a direction that if the petitionershave already submitted their plieation \‘t " \lwritten V ~ statement on 14/07/2006, learned . i trial court, on an ap ./ ‘ . Oi\ x7 made by the petitioners shall consider the earlier order sheet and pass appropriate orders in this regard. (6) If the written statement has already been filed, the trial court shall proceed with the trial of the suit in accordance with law as if their right to tile written statement has not been closed. (7) With this observation, the instant writ petition is disposed of. Sd/— Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge