IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR(C.G.) W.P. N0. 72005 PETJTIONER RESPONDENTS ^v ^'^ Sant Ram Aged about 50 years S/o. Balduram Satnami R/o. Village Bhothidih P.S. Nawapara, Tahsil Abhanpur, District. Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS ^_^ . :1. Re^^ram Sahu S/o. Bharat Sahu, R/o. Village Murla, P.S. Nawapara, (Rajim), Tahsil & Nawapara, District Raipur '^^••""....•••*' ( C.G.) ^" ,/^^^^ ,<^;-y..'-- ' ^'" ....-' .-•<sv:-^f€ ^•••'' ^^>"" 2. Chhabiram Sahu Aged about 42 years S/o. Ramdayal R/o. Village Bhothidih P.S. Nawapara, Tahsil Abhanpur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3. Vinay, S/o.Santram Satnami R/o. R/o.Village Bothidih, P.S.Nawapara (Rajim), Tahsil Nawapara, District Raipur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA _1- XI-HC-78 ^r^m^.^fr^,^ray /^^" .^..^...^.^•t-^4"" ^200.^^ ~ an^^T^TRpWR ^aHgn^sTaR'n^ lTFR5T^^TT^ gn^$iq^p('5?f^[) ^aTSR^rf^T^^ 43- iPiqfe^WR5t"if^t^I^R ^grf^TSi^^ 22-8-2005 Heard Mr. Raghoivendra pradhw, coun%l for the petitioner, on admission. J^e. p^titioner has preLfer|?ed this writ patition under Articie 227 of the Constitution of India, be|ng aggrieved by order dated 20 Juiy, 2005, passed by the 11th Adclitio|ial District Judge, Raipur, whereby the executing Court i.e. the iearn^d llt Additiona} Distpict Judge has petitioner for staying the execution rejected the applicGtion of 1+ie| proceedmgs. Brief facts leading to fi!ing|of this writ petition neces^sry for its |disposai ar®that on ex-parte de^ree was passed by the 5 AdditionaJ ^istrict Judge cgainst -t+ie p&titio^er in a ^jit fil&d by respond&nt No.l id thereafter, 1+ie Execution Cas^ was filed by respondent No.l and the xme 15 pendin9 before the lljn Addjtional bistrict Judge- The ititioner's case is that he has fil^d an application for sett'mg aside the c-parte decree which is psndin9lbefore 1+is 10th AdditionoJ District |ud9e, ftaipur. Thfir&fors, the e^&cution be stayed. However, the <ecuting Court has rejected 1+ie rirayer ofthe petitioner statjng tiiat |e petitioner ou9ht to have obtaine^ the stay from the Court where -tihe ^plication for sett'Jng aside the| ex-parte decree is pending and pr^eviousiy/ twice the application has fc|een rejected. XI-HC-78 *1M«1^HT^ ViT^ '<)1<|10<4, UTilwK?, ROW^ .^...p<.^.g.l^. 3T1^57 q^P (^clijdt^) ^2005 3?1^5Tq?rRii<p ?isiT3n^?ra!w? Soma ?;CTSR^rf^T3TT^?T In "t+ie drcumstonces, I the order impugned so as to under ^rt-icle 227 of the C^t therefore/ iiable to b<s dismisse^l admission stage itself. Consequently, M.(W.)P.N4 disposed of, <bl^Ic6'41v1+ll+irtT^f(^^l ^Rrl^lK ^3rf^T3IT^^T ^lo not find <xny ill@9<xjity or infirmity in ^xerdse the extra ordinary jurjsdiction ^nsti-hjtion of India, The petition is and it is accordjn9Jy, dismissed, a+ th^ ^.3206/2005 <& LA.No.7132/2005 stand Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge