m-^s.^^ss.^^^••s*—-^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILAS PU R PETITIONEER RESPONDENTS VV.P. N0.1958/2005 Shri Narayan Agrawat, aged about 60 years, S/o Late Ramcharan Lal Agrawal, r/o Aminpara, Near Sheetla Mandir, Raipur, Tahsil and Distt. Raipur (C.G.). Versus :1. Musammat Ishwari Bai Agrawal, aged about 42 years, Wd/o Late Satya Narayan Agrawal, r/o village Mova, Post Mova, Tahsil and Distt. Raipur (C.G.). 2. Ravi Vikram Agrawal, aged about 31 years, S/o Late Satya Narayan Agrawal, r/o Puranibastj, NearJaitushav Math, Raipur, Tahsil and Distfc. Raipur (C.G.),, 3. Smt, Geeta Bai Agrawal, aged about 42 years, Jauje Dhirendra Kumar Agrawal, r/o Baloda- bazar, Tahsil Balodabazar, Distt. Raipur (C.G.). 4. Smt. Gayatri Bai Agrawal, aged about 40 years, Jauje Rammurti Agrawal, r/o Village Jarve, Post Jarve, Tahsil Balodabazar, Distt. Raipur (C.G.Z). 5. Smt. Prabha E3ai Agrawal, aged about 38 years, Jauje Rajesh Agrawal, r/o Palari, Near Video House,, Post Palari, Tahsil Balodabazar, Distt. Raipur (C.G.). 6. State of C.G., Through Collector- Raipur (C.G.). 7. Smt. Jarina Banj, W/o Shri M.P.Ganj, 8. Smt. Haseena Ganj, W/o Shri HanifGanj, 9. Smt. Parvin Ganj, VV/o Shri M.Iqbal Ganj, Mote : Respondents No.7,8 & 9 are residents of Ganjpara, Near Telghaninaka, Raipur, Tahsil and Distt. Raipur (C.G.). PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OFTHE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA L-——.—- --^——— ^ PetitSoner HSGH COURT OF CHHATT3SGARH AT BSLASPUR Wnt Petition No.1958 of200S Shri Narayan Agrawal Respondents Versus Musammat Sshwari Bai Agrawai and others Cv'Vrit Petition under Articie 226/227 of the Constitution of Indss) (SB: Hon'bie Mr. T.P. Sharma,J.I Present:- Mr.Ratan Pusty, counsei forthe petltioner. Mr.Pawan Kesharwani, counsei for respondents No.1 to 5 and 7, 8 and9. Mr.Sushil Dubey, Govt.Advocate for respondent No.S/State. ORALORDER (Passed on 8th August, 2010) 1. Heard. 2. i have perused the order dated 28.2.2005 (Annexure P/4) passed by the 9th Additionai District Judge (F.T.C.), Rajpur, in Civii Sult No.12-A/05 ciismlsslng the appiication for taking document on record filed by ths pstitioner under Order 7 Ruie 14 read with Section 151 ofthe C.P.C. 3. Lsarned counseS for the petitionsr submits that both the parties have not iead their evidence tlll today, aithough he has fiied the appSication for taking document on record after considerabSy deSay, but the documents sought to be taken on record for essentia! to prove the nature of property and to prove pieadings of the parties. 4. On the other hand, learned counsei for respondents No. 1 to 5 and 7, 8 and 9 submits that onjy with a view to deisy the triai v/hich is pending -—•^"s. ^'l 1 y ,^' ^' -2-— since 1992, the present petitioner has flled this applicatson in the year 2005. 5. From perusaS ofthe pleadings and copy ofthe order impugned, it appears that documents sought to be taken on record. Out of 17 documents, 15 documents are copies of registered saie deed and documents No.16 and 17 are photocopies of certified copy of sa!e deed dated 17.3.73 and 28.3.73 which are not necessary for disposai of the suit. 6. At this stags, the parties have not Sed their evidence, therefore, no prejudice would be caused to any of the parties and deSay can be adequateiy compensated by imposing cost. 7. Accordingiy, the petition is aSlowed. Order dated 28.2.2005 passed by the 9th Additional District Judge (F.T.C.), Raipur is hereby set aside. Appiication fited on behalf of the petiSloner is partly aSiowed relating to documents No.1 to 15, subject to payment of cost of Rs.4000/- payabie to the respondents 1 to 5 and 7, 8 and 9 within thirty days from today. Civii suit Is pending since 1992, the Court beiow is directed to expedite the triai and decide the suit as eariy as possibie. No order as to costs. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge