Fagu Ram v. Maniram

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WP (227) No.165 of 2017 Fagu Ram S/o Dayal Satyawanshi, Aged About 63 Years Resident of Bodla, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Maniram Son of Dayal

2. Sheshraj, Son of Dayal

3. Bhuddu, Son of Sewar

4. Parmeshwar, Son of Prem

5. Rameshwar, Son of Prem

6. Dinesh, Son of Prabhu (Prabhu is pre-deceased son of Prem)

7. Vimal Kumar, Son of Prahu (Prabhu is pre-deceased son of Prem) Respondent No.1 to 7 are resident of Bodla, Tehsil Bodla, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh

8. Pushpa Bai D/o Prabhu, resident of Village Koylari, Post Tahsil and District Kabirdham (CG)

9. Nirmala Bai D/o Prabhu, resident of Jhalfa, Post, Tahsil and District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh 10.

Kalpu Bhartendu, son of Fattu Bhartendu, aged about 60 years 11.

Neelkanth, son of Kalu Bhartendu, aged about 39 years, 12.

Leelabai, Wd/o Paras Bhartendu, aged about 32 years, 13.

Hemlata, D/o Kalu Bhartendu, aged about 15 years 14.

Kundan Singh, son of Paras Bhartendu, aged about 12 years 15.

Deepak, son of Paras Bhartendu, aged about 10 years Respondent No.13 to 15 are being minor through natural guardian mother Leela Bai, Wd/o Paras Bhartendu Respondent No.10 to 15 are resident of Ghoghrapara, Pandariya, Tehsil Pandariya, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh 16.

Suresh Kumar, son of Kalpu Bhartendu, aged about 27 years, Constable Police Station Salhewara, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh

17.

Gayatri Bai W/o Amit Kumar Kurre, aged about 35 years, resident of Katghora, Tehsil Katghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh 18.

Taran Bai, wife of Kanshiram 19.

Tarabai, wife of Khilawan 20.

Motiram, son of Heeralal 21.

Bhagwati, daughter of Sukhiram 22.

Salik, son of Pyare 23.

Babulal, son of Prem 24.

Kushar, son of Bhagwanta Respondent No.18 to 24 are resident of Bodla, Tahsil, Bodla, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh 25.

The State of Chhattisgarh, Through Collector, Kawardha, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr.P.P.Sahu, Advocate For Respondent No.25:

Mr.Avinash Singh, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 6 /3/2017 1.

This Court by order dated 2.11.2016 in Writ Petition (227) No.556/2015 (Faguram Vs. Maniram and others) directed that on payment of process fee, Tahsildar be called for examination.

2.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that Tahsildar has already been examined on 5.10.2015, therefore, his examination is not necessary.

3.

Be that as it may, the trial Court is directed to look into the same and if Tahsildar has already been examined and he

further examination is not necessary, then his examination may be dispensed with. It is left to be decided by the trial Court. The trial Court is at liberty in this behalf. 4.

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition finally stands disposed of.

Sd/- (Sanjay K.Agrawal) Judge B/-