c BEFORE THE HON'BI-E HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Stiiglt'flgnch CIVIL REVISION NO.2^^ /2004 APPLICANTS PLAINTIFFS PETITIONERS ^' ^y fy J»^ ^- J^A Smt Rama Paya Thakur, aged about 78 fears, widow of late Ganga Singh Thakur, Sheela Thakur, Daughter of Late Ganga Singh Thakur, aged about 43 years, Both are resident of Kanji House, near Gandhi Chowk, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) VERSUS A RESPONDENTS lON-APPLICANTS DEFENDANTS L Jagat Narayan,sonof Manglj y' Prasad, aged about 59 years, y Ram Narayan, aged about 35 years, son ofJagat Narayan, Both are residents of Ledi Talab, Baijnath Para, Raipur .(Chhattisgarh) CIVIL REVISION UNDER SECTION 115 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE.1908 T XI-HG—78 '5^r ^l^ld-4, s9tii-H<i<o, [®!<ni-Mlj,< NiNdt W^T^'"""""""^"""""""""""""""""""^. 200 ^TT TR^' ( ^I^^I) ^l^i^TK^ ^^I^T^T^^W S.B. Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Ataarwal 07.11.2009 Shri Sudip Verma, Advocjate Feeling aggrieved by thej by XI Ith Additjonal District Jud^ Appeal No. 03/04, the applicant^ The brief facts of the casfe a suit against the responden<js examination of their witnesses dismissed for want of prosecuti^ month, an application under Or<| trial court without filing any app| which was dismissed as time bi preferred Misc. Appeal and vjd^ a!so dismissed. Hence this revi; 1 haVe heard the counsel perused the order impugned. Undisputedly, the applic^tion was filed after lapse of perioc| application for condonation of has rightly dismissed the pl^intiff Appellate Court also rightly '^P?fe^?R ^TR^ ^ 'fe^t ipsl^K '^<stfw3?n^r for applicants. order dated 20.09.2004, passed ie, Raipur in Miscellaneous Civil have preferred this revision. are that, the plaintiffs instituted |s. He took several times for |and on 08.07.1993 the sult was ^n. After lapse of more than one |er 9 Rule 9 was filed before the lication for condonation of delay |irred. Thereafter,the applicants ^ impugned order the same was feion. ^ppearing for the applicants and for restoration of the suit of limitation without filing any [delay; therefore, the trial court l^intiff's application. The First VrteasessA--——— disrrtissed XI-HG—78 ^^l'^T^N' ^^T^T^TW^ ^p ,^. Sal^ T T^r ^i!qi<n^, ^til^^Ko, f^cni^^i W^R'iT ^N?^ "^200 L^ ^?T 'V^^ ( ^I^^) I^<iW ^St^ 3^ -2 in view of the above, 1 fSp not find and jurisdictional error in the order impugned. In the result, the revisionl be and is hereby dismissed at ^Fite^iW^^ ^ fezt <PSI^K ^^HBTI^T being devoid of merit is liable to idmission stage. 1 Sd/- N. K. Agarwal Judge