'^ ...1< 6—' - ^.-- - ^... - : y^ .'^ _ ^N THE H^H COURT PF CHlj^TTISGARH AtB[ BXLASPUR • r- ^'^ ^- •^ \ ^ ^•vw ^c^ r.p. NO. ^-7- /2QQ^ fc<; i CJ PBTITIONEB^^ / A^-<^" i^^ ^•••^y' ./"^9\y .^7 <:^ rf'RESPONDENT ^ ^-7 Rasddielawan s/o Axiant, C^iste-Abir^ aged aboat 5©years ^ Occupatlon- Agrj.culture, r/o viilage karaihiya- khand, P«s. Patna, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Koria. C.G» (PLAINTIFF) VE RS U S Pyarelal s/o Salshram Yadav» Caste- Ahir, aged about 40 years, Gccupation Agriculture» r/o village Karaihiya- Miandy P»S^ Patna> Tehsil Baikunthpur^ District Koria, C.G* »RTT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONST2TUTION OF INDIA. XI-HC-22 W^F^T wi^^n^r ^lt^^fN 3^ ^iHicl^, ^Tfl^^j<$5 M^l^gT HrH^TTSb^lcb 3ll^l^H«h ^.^f...^.\^.. W^ 200 IG|^ ^n^T?^<TTa^:^f?cT 1.8.2005 Shri A.K. Prasad, cou^ Shri Anil Pandey, coui| Heard. The petitioner has p^ Article 227 of the Consti] legality, propriety and corr^ 4>l^fd<lfl^ ^l^dT^'te^il^^K ^3:rf^q'3:n^T isel for the petitioner. isel for the respondent. •eferred this writ pelition under bution of India questioning the ctriess of order dated 06.12.2003 passed by learned Civil Judjge Class-1, Baikunthpur, District Koriya whereby learned applications filed by the p^titioner under Order 6 Rule 7 & Order 13 Rule 1 of the Codd regarding the property m plaint. By the application 1 CPC the petitioner wanted pendency of civil suit the Civil Judge has rejected the of the Civil Procedure. The petitioner hereii^ filed a civil suit against the respondent herein for decl^ration and permanent injunction pntioned in Paragraph-2 of the 'iled under Order 6 Rule 17 of the- to seek amendment that during 3etitioner has been dispossessed, therefore, a prayer for the ^ossession he wanted to insert in the civil suit and vide appljication filed under Order 13 Rule 1 of the CPC the petitiojiier wanted to produce original registered Will deed on i| already filed along with the| ecord, photocopy of which was plaint. Learned counsel for |;he respondent submits that the petitioner filed the amend |nent application and application for taking document on r^cord with a delay of five years, therefore, the applications below. |\vere rightly rejected by the court XI-HC-22 3TI^f^T R^1^3TT^T ^RT^^f^T ^/ ^^ ^ 3^ ^psn^W, ^rftWI^, ^TRTy 3ll^l Msicb flTTOPTTS?^nW'"""""""" " ^^ 200 f^g--<; W^T^FcrTW^fN' —^'t' But, it is admitted evidence of the petitioner) document which the petitio| registered original Will question of doubting the 1 that the petitioner wanted <j subsequent events happen) Therefore, these applicatioi the court below and so fai can be compensated in ter|iiis writ petition is allowed, c) applications filed under Or| the Code of Civil Procedij Rs.500/- and learned Civj consequential order. Cost \ Certified copy as per ^" <=hj^?d41^ ^l^dT^1Wl'<^1^4K. ^3T^T3TT^T position that, so far, even the has not been commenced and aer wanted to bring on' record is a deed, therefore, there was no senuineness of the Will and also o insert by way of amendment the ed after filing of the civil suit. is ought to have been allowed by ' as the delay is concerned, that of the cost. Accordingly, the rder impugned is set asi.de, the ier 6 Rule 7 8s Order 13 Rule 1 of re are allowed with the cost of 1 Judge is directed to pass the ;o be paid within 15 days. 'ules. L.C. Bhadoo Judge (^^fe^)