J. •( IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR APPELLANTS DEFENDANTS SECOND APPEAL NO.^^ /2006 u Singl& Bench /^'fcy //^/ / ^ V ^oy. <^/ ^ .3) -4) .5) 6) 7) 8) ^) RESPONDENTS PLAINTIFFS VERSUS 1) Pawaa Kum.ar Agrawal, S/o Late Bharat Lal, Aged about^ipyears Mukund Lal Agrawal S/o Late BharatLal,^ecf^t«^-63 ye^r5. Both are Resident of Behind Bus Stand Abhanpur, Distt- Raipur (C.G.) Smt. Keshar @ Keshari Bai Widow of late Shri Ramkumar Agrawal Arun ^.umar Agrawal S/o Late Ram Kumar Agrawal Santosh Kumar Agrawal S/o Late Ram Kumar Agrawal Anup Kumar Agrawal S/o Late Ram Kuniar Agrawal Ashok Kumar Agrawal S/o Late Ram Kumar Agrawal AppeUant No. 3 to 7 are R/o Arun Trade Combine Devpuri Tahsil & District- Raipur (C.G.) Smt. Mithila Agrawal W/o RamSnahi Agrawal R/o Gudhiyari Raipur (C.G.) Smt. Shail Agrawal W/o Sri Budh Narayan Agrawal R/o D.M.C. Colony, Kumhari, Tahsil & District- Durg (C.G.) Shrishchandra Agrawal S/o Late Vimal Chand Agrawal Aged about 65 years, R/o Vivekanand Nagar, Raipur. u- ^ ^" ^' 2) Smt. Bhagwati Agrawal W/o ^" Vmial Chand Agrawal Aged about 61 years, 3) Smt. Nitisha Agrawal Aged about 32 years D/o Late Vunal Chand Agrawal Appellant No.l to 3 are Resident of 65, Vivekanand Nagar Raipur Smt. Usha Kiran Agrawal aged about 49 years, W/o Madan Murti Agrawal D/o Late Vimal Chaiid Agrawal R/o Shailendra Nagar, Raipur. Smt. Manisha Agrawal Aged about 37 years W/o Pramod kuraar Agrawal, R/o Vinoba Nagar, Bilaspur(C.G.) 6) Smt. Rama bai Agrawal aged ./' about 59 years, W/o SushU Narayan Agrawal R/o Kota, Raipur. 7]^ Smt. LiUi bai Agrawal aged about 55 years W/o Madhur Murti Agrawal, R/o Sunder Nagar, Raipur. 8) Ramesh Agrawal aged about 49 " years S/o Shatrughan Lal Agrawal 9) Girish Kumar Agrawal Aged about ^ 45 years S/o Shatrughan Lal Agrawal, 10) Jyotish kumar Agrawal aged about 41 years S/o Shatrughan Lal Agrawal 11) Santosh Kumar @ Satish Agrawal y S/o Shatrughan Lal Agrawal All R/o Near Raipur Naka Baloda Bazar, Distt- Raipur (C.G.) 3. )1 12) Smt. Shaati Devi Agrawal aged ^ about 50 years W/o BramhaNand Agrawal R/o -Baaiyapara, Purani Basti Raipur (C.G.) 13) Smt. Kanti Agrawal aged about 50 ^" yeardas W/o Dashrath Lal Agrawal R/o Old MungeU, Near Bus Stand, Bhatapara, Distt- Raipur, l^) Smt. Gita Devi Agrawal Aged about 47 years, W/o Mahesh Kumar Agrawal R/o Near- B.T.I. CoUege Shankar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 13) Smt. Maya Bai Agrawal Aged about 67 years, Widow of Late Navranglal Agrawal R/o Kapa Mova, Raipur Tah & Distt- Raipur. 16) State of C.G. Through: CoUector ./ Raipur , Distt- Raipur (C.G.) (^ MEMO OF SBCOND APPEAL UNDER SE^TION fll^5)OF CODE OF CrVrIL PROCEDURt XI-HC-78 4^ +11^<^( Sh*lich 3^T ^l^ld^, ^Tn<M4l(o, f®«rtl^^< __ s.A. ^o. <s^ ^ 200^ 3ii^i ^^^h (^dl^^) 3Ti^T^r^l<=h cT§TT3TT^T$t)HI<=t) 5^<TT8[K^f?cT3TT^T cbNf<n41ri ^iH<viT^:tel:^i'<Rt<-<ii< ^3rf^R'3TT^T 27-02-2007 Dr. Shri N.K. Shukla, learn^d Senior Advocate with Shri Anil Gulati, counsel for the appeilants. Shrs Akhil Agrawal, Panel L| Heard on I.A.No.2513/200^ fortaking Considered and allowed. Qocuments Also heard on admission. [awyer for the State/respondent No.16. documents on record. locuments are taken on record. Learned senior counsel f< outset that the defendants/appell; demonstrating that during the lifi partition between his sons Dhan Agrawal and that pursuant to si recorded in the name of Mandall- of Dhaneshwar Prasad Agrawal. f ^r the appellants submitted at the very ^nts could succeed in this appeal only by ^ time of Hira Lai Agrawal there was a ^shwar Prasad Agawal and Ram Karan |ch partition the suit lands came to be |in Bai, widow and Gomati Bai, daughter ^o other point was urged. Marldalhin in support of his argumer|ts Advocate has placed reliance or( Agrawal, PW-1 in paragraph-8 of| Lal Agrawal, the names of recorded on the suit lands. How^ to prove partition between Dhan^ Agrawal. Both the Courts belo\| material on record given a findii| Dhaneshwar Prasad Agawal and| based on proper appreciation of t| >, Dr. Shri N.K.Shukla, learned Senior the admission made by Shri Srichand |his testimony that after the death of Hira Bai and Gorhti Bai came to be |ver. this by itself would not be sufficient ^shwar Prasad Agawal and Ram Karan v have on proper appredation of the ig that no partition took piace between Ram Karan Agrawal. The said finding is ie material on record and cannot be said iiai. XI-HC-78 ^n^T^rf^ri^ cTSTT3TT^Tst)^ich -Y^ Tumane / \ ^' o/ < *11*1^1 Sh+lich 3^ ^i^Krt^, ^Tfl<iji<o, fcicni^y S,A ,/^So,^^ ^: 200^ 311^1 ^5<ch (yii^^) ^<TT^K^f?cT3TT^T _-2-' to be perverse.Thus, a concurre in Second Appeal. in this view of the matter, °bi^?<-i41-i ^i^^T^fWi'<f^^i< ^3Tf^R'3TJ^T \\t finding of fact is no^open to challenge ^o substantial question of law is involved in this Second Appeal which is| accordingly dismissed at the stage of admission. I There shall be no order as tto costs. In view of above, M.(C.)|P.No.2234/2006 for grant of stay a!so stands dismissed. __—1-— Sd/- DUip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge P.T.O. ^