K^ IN THE HIGH COURTOF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR MISC. AppEALNo. ^-,3 /2oii SlngleB^ncfa APPELLANT : [Defendant No.l] l^/f •^^•<{ RESPONDENTS [PlaintiffNo.l] [Plaintiff No.2} [Plaintiff No.3] [Pldintiff No.4} [Plaintiff No.5] [Plaintiff No. 6] [Plaintiff No. 7] .»«•• ^l) k2) 3) 4) ,5) ^?) Chetan Das Rajput, S/o Late Rewachand Rajput, aged about 58 years,. R/o Kaserpara, Raigarh, Tehsil SE District- Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS Smt. Koushilya Devi, Wd./o fcate Mohan Lal, aged about 55 years; . . Lalit Rajput, S/o Late Mohan Lal, aged about 30 years; Vijay Rajput, S/o Late Mohan Lal, aged about 28 y.ears; Smt. Jayanti, D/o Late Mohan Lal,aged about 32 years; Smt. Seema, D/o Late Mohan Lal,aged, about 30 years; Daulat Ram, S/o Late Rewachand, aged about 42 years; Ashish @ Manish, S/o Late Thakur Ram, All R/o Sindhi Colony, Raigarh, Tehsil 8s District-Raigarh (C.G.) ^fendant No.2] \^8) .Shri Banke Bihari Infracom Pvt. Ltd., through: its Director, Harvilas Agrawal, S/o Shri Bhola Prasad, aged about 42 years; R/a Chaitanya Nagar, Dhimrapur . Road, Raigarh, Tehsil SE District-Raigarh (C.G.) [Defendant No:3] ^9) Mukesh Tiwari, S/o Shri Kripa Shankar Tiwari, aged about 33 years; R/o Dugdh Dairy Road, Rajeev Nagar, Kotra Road, Raigarh, Tehsil & District- Raigarh (C.G.) .^ [Defendant No.4] ^ 10) [Defendant No.5] 11) Ajay Agrawal, S/o Shri Rajkumar Agrawal, aged about 35 years; R/o Gandhigunj, Raigarh, Tehsil 8s District- Raigarh (C.G.) State of Cbbattisgarh, through: The Collector, District-Raigarh (C.G.) . MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER ORDER-43, RULE- Kri OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. 1908 ^ v 'HC—78 sn^T w (<•<]•* wi sn^i wiw 'S'ST "l<i<fici4i,®^i1'M<i6,fs«yiiyy,< . ...(Y).;.A.!.(N<.0:..6.^ ^^...,...,...^...,..,..-.....»:.^/.^.,.^...^^QQ '^ STI^I'q?^ ('5?f3^ll) wwwai^T an^i S.B. Hon'bie Shri Justice N.K. Aisarv.ai 17.11.2011 Shri Adii-Minhaj, counsel | Shrl Prafu!! N. Bharat, coi| for the appellant. |nse! for respondents No. 1 to 7. Shri Santosh Kumsr Tiw^ri, counsei for respondents No. 8, 9 and 10. Shiri Sanjeev Agrawal, PLj Shri Tiv/ari, tearned courl submits that Misc. Appea! No. impugned dated 4.5.2011 has ^ vlde order dated 22.5.2011 . in view of above fact, appearing for the appeltant of directing the triai Court to deq Prayer is reasonable and Accordingiy, the misc. aj court is directed to decide thel costs. fsel for respondents No.8, 9 and 10 ^/2011 filed by them against the order ^lready been dismissed by this Court «bi<<!<'i<fl-)iwrcif ^f 1sTst 'rfa^re °S sifin aii^i for the State/resDondent No.11 . Shrl Adil Minhaj, learned counse! subijiits that this appeai may be disposed jde the suit expeditiously. fs aliowed. 5|)peai stands disposed of. The trial sult expeditiousiy. No ^der_asjo Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge ./-