HI@H COURT OF CHHATTIS^RH AT BIb^SPUR M.A.Ne.60 of 2009 ApodlQnts &efendcxnts 1, Man Singh, aged about 48 years S/o Botari, Caste-Satnami/ R@s©ond@nts Defendants 2(o) Munni Bai, aged aboyt 35 years M/idow of late Shri Bodhan, (b) Lalit, aged about 26 years, S/o tate Shri Bodhan. ^ (c) Raju/aged about 23 years, S/o late Shri Bodhan (d) Manju, aged about 20 years, D/o bte Shri Bodhan. (e) Lalita; aged about 16 years, &/o late Shri BodhQrs. (f) Lokeshwars.aged about 14 years/D/o late Shri Bodhan. (g) Sagar Chand, aged about 09 years S/o tate Shri Bodhan, (h) Tukeshwar/aged about 06 years, S/o tate Shri Bodhan No. "(e) to (h) are Mlnor -riirough their natural Suardlan Mother AAunni Bai, Widow of bte.'Shri Bodhan, Caste-Satnam1, Al! are R/o Viilage-BundeJi, Tahsil and bistrict- Mahasaiiiund (C.0.) 3. Dhellya, aged about 56 years, D/o Botari (W/o Dunan Satnami), ft/o VillaQe Firangi, Passgaon, Bhurkoni Tahsii and District- Mohasamund (C^.) 4. Bodhni Bai, aged about 46 years, &/o Botarri/ W7o (Redhey Lal Satnami) K/o Viiige-Sewati, Pass9aon Bharuamuda Kolaa, Tahsl! and District-Mahasamund, (C^<) Versus 1.' Jethuram, aged about 60 years/ (Husband Jate Smt.^anesh Bai) S/o. VishaJi Kurre :ZJ 3 -. "2L-- 2. Khilawan, aged about 37 years, S/o Jethuram- 3. Budhram, o.Qed about 26 years, S/o Jefhuram Kurre. Al! ar'e Occupation-Agricyl'tursst, R/o VjlJage Firangi/ Tahsii and Oistrict Mahasamund (C.6.} 4. State of Chhattisgarh, l+iirough Collector, AAcriiasamund, bistrict Mohsadmund (C.6.) (APPEAL UNDEft SECTION 43 RULE I (U) OF THE CTVIL PftOCEDURE CODE) (SB; Hon'bte Mr. T.P. Sharma, J.) Mr- SuniS Sahu, counse! for +he appelbnts. Mr-Sameer Behar, Panei iawyer for the State/respona'ent No.4< OR^L ORDER (Pass©don 18th Juns, 2009) The appel!o.nts have filed this misce!laneoys appeal against the Judgment & decree dated 1.1.2009 passed by the First Additional District Judge, Mahasamund in Ciyi! Appeal No.18^/2008 whereby the teamed Fsrst ^dditjonal District Judge has remanded the cose for providing an opportunity of hearing to the respondents/piajntiff for impieading the necessary parties and declde the case afresh. ^ 2. The present appeltents/defendants of the Civil Sust have chaltenged the ordler of remcind on the ground that 1+ie Court'bebw has not considered the gr'ounds raised in the appeo! and has remanded the case for providing an opportunity of hearing to the respondents/pbintjff for impleQding the necessary parties and thereby committed an sllegality.. » 3. Origjnaliy the suit for partitson was fiied by 'ttse present respondents No.l to 3 ogainst the present appellants but o1+ser legal representatjyes of B/- -3- the deceosed Darshan le., Purin Bai and after her death her Jegal representatives i.e. Bhagirathi, Bharat and Jagat were not impleaded as a part/. 4. Definltely m the partition suit rebting to property of Darshan, his sons, daughters <wd other successors were necessary parties and wsthout impleading them as a party, effective decree cannot be passed/The Court below has rjghtiy remanded the case forj^rovidsng an opportunity of hearing to the respondents/plaintjff for impleadjng the necessary parties. The Court below has not committed any i!le9ajity or snfirmity jn remandsng the case. I do ^ not find any substance in the appeal. 5. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed at the motion stage itself.No (>• order as to cost. • . i— Sd/- TR. Sharma Judge i