^ I/t' '/ ^ ^^Jl,8t IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH CIVIL REVISION N0. / ^3 2006 SINGLE BENCH PETITIONER "PLAINTIFF ^My\^ ..M^""~" ^^^•' <%f-' RESPONDENTS /(DEFENDANT) B.S.P. CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED (Registration No. 1392 year 1957) Sector-1, Bhilai- Nagar Tahsil and District Durg (C.G.) Through : President Executive Committee B.S.P. Co- Operative Society Limited, Sector-1 Bhilai- Nagar, Tahsil & District Durg (C.G.) VERSUS :1 ^ MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BHILAI Through : Commissioner Municipal Corporation Bhilai Tahsil and District Durg (C.G.) ^l. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITED Through : Managing Director Bhilai Steel Plant Steel Authority of India Limited, Bhilai- Nagar Tahsil & District Durg (C.G.) t)3Q ^.X^.^. 't^TfsT ^t.3T!q. ^T^.f^ ^Sf-y y -i / -< .<^nrh // 2 // 3. NIRMAL SINGH S/o. Late Harbans Singh 4, TIRATH SINGH S/o. Late Harbans Singh 5, AMARJIT SINGH ^'. S/o. Late Harbans Singh 6, BALBIR SINGH ^' Alias Ballu Singh S/o. Late Harbans Singh All respondents 3 to 4 resident of New-Market Khurshipar, Bhilai Tahsil and District Durg (C.G.) CIVIL REVISION U/S.^15 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE XI-HC-78 *11+<dT5h+11<ft ^•'^iqic'iq,^^^^, fsidiy^< ^^ ^:/&v.::.4^0.^^200 3TT^?T T^? ('{cji^sl^T) W^T^lR^ich cTSTT3Tr^T$h^ll<=b r" \. ^) 5^T8[K^1?cT3TT^T c^ tl<§ < <' ' t 1 ^- Q6/99/2Q06 Shri V.G. Tamaskar lean Heard on admission. The appiicant has filed the Code of Civil Procedure a Court oniy on the basis of no in Learned counsel for the is not maintainable in view of aiso the judgments of the Supi Vs, Ram Chander Rai and otj Swarai Developers and oth therefors, he seeks to proceedings avaiiabie under certified copy of the impugned Accordingly, the revisiot liberty as aforesaid. Reglstry t<| order provided that the c<| authenticated copy of the sam^ cr)i<M?<yi41^ WT^Y ff te^t <Rl^d<1 ^3Tf^T^TT^T ed counsel for the applicant. |:his revision petition under section 115 of the suit has been dismissed by the trial ^tructions from the piaintiff. lappllcant fairly concedes that this revision 1|he proviso to section 115 ofthe CPC and feme Court in the case of Surva Devi Rai iejre_reported in (2003) Vol. 6 SCC 575 as well as in the case of Shiv Shbkti Coop. Housina Societv, Naapur Vs. i£s reported in (2003^ 6 SCC 659 and with|draw it with liberty to ffile appropriate ;he law. He also prays for return of the >rder. petition is dismissed as withdrawn with return the certified copy of the impugned iunsel for the applicant fumishes an Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge P.T.O.