r-'s.i.^g'? IN THE IION'BLE H1GH COURT OF CHHA SJteGU" BENCH rnsG^RW »^w' BILASPUR,(CHHATriSGARH) WRIT PETITION (227) Nb.^ '^ /q OF 20D9 (SJ^ PETITIONER DEFENDANT Gramin Seva Sansthan, a: Society . registered under Madhya Pradesh . Societies Kegistration Act, 1973 (Now Chhattisgarh Societies Registration Act, 1973) bearing Registration Sl. No. 15828 dated 06th December 1:985 with Registrar of Societies, Bilaspur (C.G.) having Registered office' at P.0. Pali, Tehsil Katghora, District Bilaspur (C.G. . Present .Address Behind • Jebbal & Sons, Nehru . Nagar, Bilaspur (C.G.) - 495001, through its President, Shri Vijay Tiwari, R/o Janta Quarters, Behind House of Smt. Safyabhajna Awasthi, in the Lane of Jebbal & Sons, Nehru Nagar, Bilaspur (C.G.) -495001. . . VERSUS R.ESPONDP.;NT PLAINTIF'F Housing and Urban Development Corporat:ion Ltcl., A Central Govt. Company, registered under the Companies Act, 1956,havingits Registered Office in HUDCO Bhawan, India 1-Iabi.tat Centre Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110003 and its Regional Office at 1-B, Surya Apartment, Katora Talab, Raipur (C.G.) - 492001. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF TI-iE CONSTiTUTION --. ^^f-^--^—..^^^^v ^.:^iW9f,h^M y^ 3nt?i ^ feiN 'R8H •?H^"T'^^T ^s? "41^1<TI'4, ^RFf®,'f^'iTCTT? 3.^..). avSv tra^ (Tpt:l^s»T) 'rem-r fflf! sn<??t •sm'S^a -HpRfl -B f^% Tf5"%TC dT3ffOT3T!^T S.B. Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Aaaiwal 26.08.2009 | Shri MK Bhaduri, Advocatd for the petitioner. Heard on admission. i The instant petition is drected against the order dated 29.07.2009 (Annexure P/5), p^ssed by the Addltional District Judge, Bilaspur, in civil suit No. I -A/09, whereby the trial court has partly allowed the application filep by the petitloner under Order 14 RuleSofCPC. The brief facts giving ri$e to this petition are that, the petitioner filed an application unc^er Order 14 Rule 5 of CPC before the trial court for framing five ^dditional issu^. The trial court, after hearing the parties on j said application, framed three addftional issues and observed fhat the other issues proposed by the petitioner are already cover^d by the issue framed in the suit, therefore, there is no necessity to frame issue No. 4 & 5, and rejected the application with reg^rd to issue No. 4 & 5. Hence this petition. | fgi Shri Bhaduri, learned coi^nsel appearing for the'c'petitioner would submit that the issue No. 4 & 5 are necessary for just declsion of the case. After hearing the counsel| appearing for the petitioner and after going through the record, jit is clear that the trial court has ^^"s^^s» ^fsg~% '^. *>.. y 'iia,. 'Sf-f'[ ^•'^^l-HC—78 3TR?I^i ?iqia:lRn Sahu ^-E^ -^4^??, 'g^ftWIS, fiir-iwy ya) TSiIW:'HfST 3IT??! ^iplf^piht •(!FR»<'.^ fstCT TfS| ^3TRn.a!^I already framed issue as issue N(). 7 that "whether the plaintiff has cause of action", and thereforq, other issues which are being insisted by the petitioner herein a|-e not necessary in the light of the issues already framed by the tri^l court, therefore, no illegality or irregularity has been committe|J by the trial court leading to manifest injustice so asto invok^ extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 227 ofthe Corlstitution of India. It is well settled principle ofl law that this Court, in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under ]Artiole 227 of the Constitution of India, should refrain itsetf from in<erfering with the order passed by the Court below, except in such pases where perversity, illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional errorlis writ large on the face of the record, which is not in the presentcase. The petition has no merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. No order asto costs. Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge