,IE c .^ -1-3 ^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (227) N0. 5^^ OF 2010 PETITIONER Defendant N0.1 RESPONDENT :- /l. s Plaintiff Defendant ' 2. No.2. Tameshwar Dhritlahre S/o Jhapar, aged about 45 years, R/o Gatapara, P.C. No. 130, Tahsil Abhanpur, District Raipur (C.G.). VERSUS Suryakant Sur S/o late T.C. Sur, aged about 45 years, R/o Shailendra Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.). State of Chhattisgarh, through Collector, Raipur (C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^^' ^7 HIGN COURT OF GHHATTISGARH AT Slnale Bench: Hon'Me Shri Justlee Prashaiit Kumar_Mlshra Petltloner Respondente Versus Tameshwar Dhrltlahre Suryakant Sur and another. Blm Shri Vjmlesh Bajpal, counset for the petitioner. Shri Sumit Verma, Pane! Lawyer for respondent No.2/State Writ Petitlon under Article 227 of the CQnstltution of ORAL ORDER ; - (2&.G1.2G1®) Heard. (2) Sn this under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitloner/defendant No.1 has challenged the order by the trial Court allowing plaintlffs applicatlon fited under Order 23 1 (3) of CPC atlowing the plairstlff to withdraw the sult wth to fiie a-. properiy const'rtuted suit. (3) Learned counsel for the pet'rtioner submits that slnce on an eartier occasion, the plaintlff directed to pay adequate coyrt fee on the agreed amount, aiiwwsng the appllcatlon Order 23 Rule 1(3)lsnotproper. (4) In the oplnlon of thls Court, the Seamed tria! Court has not committed any error of law or juriselidlon by allowlng the to wfthdraw the sult and fite a property constitirted suit, If he so Sn no way the defendant No.1 Is prejudfoed by the order the trial Court and that in a tresh sult, If at all It Is fited by the he shall have atl %he opportunlty to defend Ns case. ; (5) The Instant petition falls and dismissecl at the itseif. Sd/- prashantKumarMishra Judge