I? W \ft“ 3INIELE BENGH \(r) pyalh’rmO‘ gag.) VERSUS WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227'OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. I //I ‘i/ $Rml§T¢ \' \ 8N0® IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTIgGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION NO. \S32l2005. PETITIONER /: Kanglu Singh, S/o Gajadhar Singh aged about 60 year's, Occupation- Retired Service man, R/o Janji, Tah— Masturi, Distt.‘ Bilaspur (C.G.) Through: Power of Attorney Holder Ku. Lalita Singh,>D/o Kanglu Singh, aged about 40 years, R/o Village- 'Janji, Tah‘-Masturi, Distt. Bilaspur RESPONDENTS: w 1) Shatrwhan Singh Rajput, S/o ,Shri Nathu Singh, aged about 55 years, R/o Village- Janji, Tah- Masturi, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) At present 27 Kholi, infront of Gurudwara and infront of Teg Bahadur SchooIWBiIaspur (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, Through: The Collector Bilaspur, (W) I If XI-HC—ZZ W‘W, m, W \5’47/ $f o u....uununnn~ nun...“ WWEWW -%aa%w~311%w 26-04-2005 Shri Manoj Mishra, couns Iforthe petitioner. Shri Parag Kotecha, Pan I Lawyer for the State Heard This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of india has been iiied against the order dated 1-3-2005 (Annexure—P!6) passed by the Additional District Judge, BiiaspLr in Civii Appeal No.16-A/2004, whereby the appiication flied by the petltloner under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been rejectec after its hearing. On perusal of the record it reveals that the learned Court below mentioned in the order Sheet detect 1—3-2005 that the petitioner has not disclosed the particulars/details relating to receipt of documents in the application med by him under 3rderr 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Having considered thekfacts and circumstances of the oaser'and material on record, on perusal of the order of the Court below and in View of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Surya Dev Rai vs Ramachander Rai reported in IR 2003 SC 3044, in the opinion of this Court, no case for interference in the impugned order is made out in exercise of extra-ordinary jurisdio ion under Article 227 of the Constitution ‘of lndia. However, the petitioner may raise .thesgrounds in an appeal in case such an eventuality arises. With the aforesaid observ tions, the petition stands disposed of. Consequently, M.(W.).P. 1237/05 and l.A.No. 3073/05 alsostand disposed of. Sdl- l ' Fakhruddin ‘ Judge ' .