\ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION £227} NO.51\L OF 2009 PETITIONER Non—applicant / Rajkumar, S/o Atmaram LOdhi, aged about 44 years, R/o Purena, Tahsil and Police Station Chuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS /» 1 . Budhvantin Bai, W/ o Applicants Rajkumar, aged about 38 years, /2. Ku. Usha, D/o Rajkumar, aged about 11 years (Minor) Respondent no. 2 is Minor through his natural guardian mother Budhvantin Bai, Both are R/o Village—Pipariya, Tahsil Khairagarh; District > Rajnandgaon (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA \w’ g“? HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Single Bench: Hon’ble Shri Justice: Prashant Kumar Mishra Writ Petition (227) No.6212 of 2009 Shri Rakesh Pandey, counsel for the petitionr. None for the respondent. (Passed on 20th Noember 2010) Conention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the t family Court wrongly recorded the petitioner’s consent to the erms t of te compromise or to the compromise itself on 6-7-2009 when h amittedly the etitioner did no accord any consent to the d p t compmise and wanted to contest the alication merits. ro pp on Learned counsel would submit that the order-sheet does not bear 2 si e ,t gnature of th petitioner. 2. Be that as it may, it is settled law that proceedings of the Court and the statement about whatever has transpired in the Court during the proceedings recorded in the order-sheet cannot be chailenged in the superior Courts and the appropriate remedy for the petitioner in such case would be to file a duly constituted application supported /7with an affidavit before the same Court bringing into its notice about ' v ;/ the wrong recordingof the statement of facts in the Court. e Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India ORAL ORDER v, \ Petitioner Rajkumar versus Respondents Budhvantin Bai and another Present: @ In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ram Bali vs. State of U.P., (2004) 10 SCC 598 (Para 9), the petitioner is, thus, required to agitate the matter before the family Court, where the proceedings for compromise was recorded. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for withdrawal of the writ petition with liberty to move an'appropriate application for recall of the impugned order before the family Court, Rajnandgaon, Link 3. Court Khairagarh. 5. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty moxmav—‘M i .Sd/— y l Prashant Kumar Mishra ‘ I Judge aforesaid.