@ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION No. 1109 of 2006 PETITIONER : Jawantin Bai D/o Parsram Aged about 7O years, Defendant Caste Satuami R/o village Padavpara, Mungeli, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1. Anjorda‘s S/o Ramcharan Aged about 58 years, Caste — Samami, R/o Village Narayanpur, Tahsil and Dist. — Bilaspur (C.G.) Piaintiifs 2. Mahasingh @ Mahajan Singh S/o Malikram, Aged about 38 years, Caste ’Satnami R/o village Dharampur, Tahsil Mungeti, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) 3. Durga Prasad S/o T1baluram Samamt Aged about 36 years R/o Vlllage Mottmpur Talml Mungeh Dlstt Bllaspur (C G) 4. State of Chhattisgalh Through Collector Bllaspur (C G) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB. Hon ble Shrl bans}: K. Agmhotri, J. Present: Shri Basant Dewangan, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Awadh Tripathi, Advocate for the respondents 1 to 3. Shri P.K.Bhaduri, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent No.4. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 28m day of January, 2009) Shri Tnpathl, learned counsel appearmg for the respondents l to 3 submits that this petition is preferred against interim order dated 6.12.2005 passedby the Additional District Judge, Mungeli, District Bilaspur whereunder, the order dated 02.02.2005 passed by Civil Judge, Class I, in Civil Suit No. 32-A/2003 under provisions of Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, was under challenge. Leamed counsel thither submits that the main suit i.e. Civil Suit No. 32- A/2003 has already been disposed of on 17.02.2008 where the respondents 1 to 3 have lost. In View of that, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner does not controvert the aforesaid submission. In View of the foregoing, this petition is dismissed as having become irifructuous. Consequently, M(W)P No. 864/2006, also stands dismissed. Sdl- Satish K. Agnihatri Judge