Tanukram v. Pravinchand

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (227) No.714 of 2016

1. Tanukram S/o Bhukhauram Dewangan, Aged about 40 years,

2. Lalji, S/o Bhukhauram Dewangan, Aged about 32 years,

3. Bharat, S/o Bhukhauram Dewangan, Aged about 30 years, All Resident of Umreli, Tahsil and District-Korba (CG) ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. Pravinchand S/o Bhukhauram Dewangan, Aged about 36 years, Resident of Umreli, Tahsil and District - Korba (CG)

2. Bhukhauram Dewangan, S/o Hiram Ram, Aged about 86 years, Resident of Umreli, Tahsil and District Korba (CG)

3. State of M.P. (Now Chhattisgarh) through District Magistrate, Korba, District Korba (CG) ---Respondents For petitioners :

Mr.Ravi Bhagat, Advocate For State :

Mr.Majid Ali, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 24/04/2017 Heard.

1. By the impugned order, the petitioners application for their re-examination under Order 18 Rule 17 of the CPC has been rejected by the trial Court.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the trial Court is absolutely unjustified in rejecting the application. He would further submit that the trial Court ought to have been re-examined the petitioners to exhibit certain documents.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the impugned order.

4. The trial Court has recorded sufficient reasons in rejecting the

petitioners application and has also recorded that suit is pending since last 20 years and the application was filed when the case was fixed for final hearing.

5. I am satisfied with the reasons assigned by the trial Court which are based on material available on record. I do not find any jurisdictional error in the impugned order.

6. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed. However, the trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within one month from the date of production of copy of this order on behalf of the petitioners. No order as to cost(s).

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