I‘N THEHIGH COURT OF--:CHHATTISG BILASPUR CivnRevision No. '3Lf of 2004 $ing§§~z §a§m§§h Applicant : 0 Motilal, son of Ratilal Satnami, ’3‘. aged about 3‘5 years, Agric‘ulturi‘st, Residént of Village :Kutelar, i . Tahsil Sarangarh, District ‘ Raigarh >(C,G.) VERSUS . I: k /l The State of Chhattisgarh, V Through Collector, .Raigarh 2. Mem bai w1fe of Dmesh Chandra Koka aged about 50 yea ‘ ’ Resrdent of Vlllage Kutela Tahs11 Sarangarh ' “Dlstrlct Ralgarh (C G) ,r’ / REVISION UNDER SECTION 115 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Aer/“k“ ' ( " .' '. r 6% 73/9” k ,,”, _~ A N ( ’Um‘ \NJ é 7 47 The instant revision is prefer by lhe applicant against the lmpirgned :order passed by the CMI Ju e Ciass u Sarangarh by which<thel k apphcatlon fled by the non appll ant under Order 1 Rule 1O of the Cf l has been allowed “Learned counsel for the non maintainable in view of the am ew submits that this revision isw provisions of section 115 of the CPC and In vrew of the decrsron of th Supreme Court m the matter of Shw Shaktl Coop Housrng Society Nagpur Vs Swarj Developers and others reported In (2003) 6 SCC 659 and m the matter of Surya Dev Ran Vs Ram Chander Rel and others reported m (2003) 6 SCC 675 which Is not drsputed by the leamed counsel for the applicant ln view of the aforesaid submlseions, the revision petition is dismissed as not maintainable. DWRA MISHRA ~« ‘ Judge Shri V. Tekam counsel for the applicant. E Shri Akhil Agrawal PL for respongdent No.1. c r Sd/- l/v‘i ’ ‘ j M r e a n 1%wifw W Hfw mmmW ‘ l 7 W}?! %W é‘fgm fr 31m fgtaW ' 1r . _ ‘ 13.2005;