l;g;- :^^£^-' IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE :: CG :: BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (227) N0 : 4.S'/ OF 2010 g|&i^i g. a»»^ »ESSULE SWK PETmONER PLAINTIFF tCamlesh Kumar Keshari aged 38yrs s/o Shri Madan Chand Keshari r/o Deviganj Road, Ambikapur Distt- Surguja CG -VERSUS- RESPONDENTS : DEFENDANTS ^^ .^^y" •^•^r"'" ^.-^(y ^.y ^ ^-.,, •• l^ ^'"" ^»S Bsa^^ „J''y 'ss ^'^££'r '<fe, y'£f/' /^/ \ •dhva 'i^hs^.wsh^'t VSfV ^ •'%. ^ ^sS. JT ^ ^'i .^' Smt. Malti Devi aged 58 yrs w/o Shri Madan Chand Keshari Dinesh Kiunar Keshari aged 34 yrs s/o Shri Madan Chand Keshari both : r/o Deviganj Road, Ambikapur Distt- Surguja CG Shri Madan Chand Keshari aged 60 yrs s/o Shri Ramdayal r/o Deviganj Road, Ambikapur Distt - Slirguja CG Mohan Lal Santwani s/o Shri Bhag Chand Santwaru r/o Maharaja GaU, Anibikapur Distt-SurgujaCG Jitendra Relwani aged27yrs s/o Shri K.L.ReIwaru r/o Maharaja Gali, Ambikapur Distt - Surguja CG ^ w^f Sardar Mahendra Singh Tuteja s/o Shri Ranjeet Singh Tuteja r/o Babu Para : Aaibikapur Distt - Surguja CG ffin WRIT PETITI0N UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTrrUTK)N OF lt>>lt)IA f-hf w ir Misnir; 1 Kumar Kesna Smt. Matti Devi and others. Shri Anurag Dayai Shrivastava, counsel for the petitioner. =» Writ Petition under Articte 227 of the Constitution of Indja [2) By the impugned order in this writ petition under ArtiScte 227 tho application filed under Sest'K for restraining defendant No.5 from 151 of Code of Civit Procedure construction itruction on the suit (3) The plaintiff has preferred the su'rt for declaration and partiticn injunction to restrain defendant No.3 from alienating the srty. On an earlier occasion, th'is Court whiie deciding ths miscellaneous appeal No.448/01 has held that the respondent No.3 herein who was respondent No.1 in the eariier miscetlaneous appeal, being Karta of ths family, cannot be restrained from alienating the svtt property. After the decision, the respondent No.3 has alienated a part of the to defendant No.S/respondent No.5. (4) ' The teamed tri^ Court has rejected the application, aSer cording that the plaintiff does not have prima facie and ba'ance of convenience in his favour and he is not going to suffer irreparabie defendant No.S/respondent No.5 has submitted an undertaking that if plaintiff succeeds in the suit, he shall remove the I IEI':s;!!!.-'-':!s!' l''-:lf I- r •!.! .j,C.AiC^^ -^- /'f^''% f !8!SSfe. "I 's^iafe a ,:,'!>' "ic;:^ tg^ 3 ^ ^ •a- / construction on his own expenses and shall hand over the vacant issession of the suit land to the plaintiff. (5) ln the opinion of this Court, ther the order passed by the trial /g&r^ihf |n ^S £ there is no illegali The instant ps faite is herel (6) However, it is directed that the trial Court shal} do well to disposs lit as eariy as DOSSI Sd//- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge Biri