IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH JVDICATURE AT BILASPUR REVIEW PETITION N0. ^3 /2011 W.P. (227}_/2011 APPLICANT PETITIONER 'c^ 1) 2) 3) Barat Ram S/o Anandram Aged about - 82 years Occupation - Farmer Chandrabhan S/o Anandram Aged about - 78 years Occupation-Farmer Fatte Ram Patel S/o Balmukund Aged about - 48 years Occupation - Farmar All Resident Village - Banjipali Tahsil Gharghoda and District Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENT /\-^(yl^ 1. Surendra S/o Ghanshyam Aged about - 75 years Occupation - Agriculture Resident Village - Banjipali Tahsil Gharghoda and District Raigarh (C.G.) 2) Bundrani S/o Ghanshyam Aged about - 40 years Resident Village - Banjipali Tahsil Gharghoda and District Raigarh(C.G.) R/o Banjipali Tahsil and District Raigarh(C.G.) ..^^m^ ^>"~"^ 3) Jiwandhan S/o Ghanshyam Aged about -35 years R/o Banjipali Tahsil and Dirstrict Raigarh (C.G.) 4) Rangmati W/o Late Ghanshyam Aged about - 70 years R/o Banjipali Tahsil and Dirstrict Raigarh (C.G.) 5) Indumati Nohar Prasad W/o Radheshyam Patel Aged about -50 years R/o Banjipali Tahsil and Dirstrict Raigarh(C.G.) <L^M/ 6) Urmila W/o Madan Patel R/o Village Ucchabhatti Tahsil and District Raigarh (C.G.) & ^f^^ 7) Padma W/o Shyam Sunder R/o Village Ucchabhatti Tahsil and District Raigarh (C.G.) 8) Shyam Sunder S/o Jairam Aged about - 72 years Occupation-Farmer R/o Village Banjipali Tahsil & District Raigarh(C.G.) 9) Bund Kunwar W/o Ajitram Aged about - 70 years R/o Village Banjipali Tahsil & District Raigarh (C.G.) 10) Chakradhar S/o Ajitram Aged about _ 58 years R/o Village Banjipali Tahsil & District Raigarh(C.G.) 11) Purender S/oAjitramPatel Aged about -53 years R/o Village Banjipali Tahsil & District Raigarh(C.G.) 12) KamalSingh S/oAjitramPatel Aged about -53 years R/o Village Banjipali Tahsil & District Raigarh (C.G.) ^) 13) MadanSingh S/o AjitramPatel Aged about - 44 years R/o Village Banjipali Tahsil & District Raigarh(C.G.) 14) Jagmohan S/o Gulab Ram Aged about - 60 years R/o Village Jakela Tahsil & Distict Raigarh (C.G.) ^^ \^ €.' ^•T^ 15) Ram Prasad S/o Gulab Ram Aged about & 53 years R/o Village Jakela Tahsil & Distict Raigarh(C.G.) 16) Brijlal S/o Gulab Ram Aged about & 51 years R/o Village Banjipali Tahsil & Distict Raigarh(C.G-) \ 17) Maltibai D/o Gulab Ram Aged about & 51 years R/o Village Banjipali Tahsil & Distict Raigarh (C.G.) 18) Smt Rajmati Chorasia Aged about -37 years R/o Jute Mill Labour Colony Raigarh Tahsil & Distict Raigarh(C.G.) <^^' ^/ N^i Q^m.^^f}^'^ • €§.' ^Ta^ 19) Ganpat S/oManijar Aged about & 55years R/o Raigarh Tahsil & Distict Raigarh (C.G.) 20) RamSingh S/o Kapleshwer Aged about & 65 years R/o Raigarh Tahsil & Distict Raigarh (C.G.) 21) Priyabai W/o Sukhdev R/o Village Banjipali Tahsil & Distict Raigarh (C.G.) AT^2^ 22) Rampyari W/o Shivprasad R/o Village Banjipali Tahsil & Distict Raigarh(C.G.) 23) Radhabai W/o Dinbhandhu R/o Village Banjipali Tahsil & Distict Raigarh (C.G.) \ 24) Yashodavai S/o Gopichand R/o Village Banjipali Tahsil & Distict Raigarh (C.G.) 25) Smt. Setmati W/o Hariram Aged about -52 years . R/o Village Ucchbhati Tahsil & Distict Raigarh (C.G.) ^tXi^ s^, i3|^X,^9^1^1 '^ , -?'/ -1,^"'^^^y ^L^"^-— 26) Smt.Vidya S/o Hariram Aged about - 49 years R/o Village Salihabhata Tahsil & Distict Raigarh (C.G.) 27) Loknath S/o Dataram Aged about - 52 years R/o Village Mudagaon Tahsil & Distict Raigarh(C.G.) 28) NirajMittal S/o Ram Avatar Mittal Aged about -25 years R/o Behind Gandhi Ganj Raigarh Tahsil & Distict Raigarh (C.G.) 29) State of C.G. Through, Collector Raigarh District Raigarh (C.G.) APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF ORDER DATED 15/04/ 2011 UNDER SECTION 114 WITH ORDER XLVII, RULE 1 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, AND THE HIGH COURT RULES 2007 \/':1 /-.. \ b HIGH CQURT OF CHHATTISGAPSH AT BILASPim APPLICANTS Petitioners RESPONDENTS Review Petition No. 83 of 201 1 Barat Ram & others Versus Surendra & others (APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF ORDER DATED 15.04.2011 PAQSED IN WP "" (227)N0.1998/2011) (SB: Hon'ble Mr. N.K. Aaarwal. J.) Present : Ms. Deepali Pandey, Advocate for the applicants. ORALORDER (Passedon 11.10.2011) 1. Heard Ms. Deepali Pandey, Counsel for the review petitioners in Chamber under the provisions of Rule 90(2) of the High Court of Chhattisgarh Rules, 2007. 2. By this petition, the applicants seek revtew of the order dated 15.04.2011, passed in W.P (227) No. 1998 of 2011 (Barat Ram & others v. Surendra & others). 3. This Court, on the prayer made by the counsel for the petitioners, disposed of the petition directing the trial court to dispose of the suit expeditiously. 4. After hearing the counsej appearing for the applicants on the grounds taken in the review petition, this court is of the opinion that the applicants have failed to make out any ground for review of the order dated 15.04.2011. Moreover, the order has been passed on the prayer made by the counsel for the petltioners. Under the garb of the review ^^s ^ . ¥ ^sasis \ petition, the applicants seek an opportunity to argue the entire case afresh which would amount to convert the review petition into an appeal and the same is not sustainable in law. 5. For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, the review application is dismissed. No order as to costs. Sahu Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge