The Raipur Development Authority v. Kishan Sahu
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Review Petition No. 8 of 2019 The Raipur Development Authority, Through Its Chief Executive Officer, Second Floor, Bhakti Matakarma Commercial Complex, New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Applicant
Versus
1. Satyavidya Real Estate Pvt. Ltd, through Director, Arun Agrawal, S/o Satyanarayan Agrawal, aged about 52 years, R/o Ward No.07, Post Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh
2. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of Housing & Environment, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
3. Assistant Revenue Officer Raipur Development Authority Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
4. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Raipur (CG) ---- Respondents And Review Petition No. 23 of 2019 The Raipur Development Authority, Through Its Chief Executive Officer, New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur, (Chhattisgarh).
---- Applicant
Versus
1. Kishan Sahu S/o Bhuneshwar Sahu, Aged About 37 years, R/o Village Dunda, Tahsil and District Raipur Chhattisgarh
2. State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Department of Housing and Environment, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Post & PS Mandir Hasaud, Raipur (Chhattisgarh).
---- Respondents For Applicant :
Mr. Ashish Shrivastava, Advocate For respondents :
Mr. Aman Kehsarwani, Advocate.
For State :
Mr. Vimlesh Bajpai, GA.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 29/01/2019 1.
Having carefully gone through the review petitions, the order under challenge and the papers annexed therewith, I am satisfied that there
is no error apparent on the face of the record, warranting reconsideration of the order under review.
2.
At this stage, Mr. Ashish Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that six months further time may be granted to comply with the order of this Court dated 13.10.2017 and subsequent orders. The said prayer is vehemently opposed by Mr. Aman Kehsarwani, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, stating that they have been deprived of possession of their suit property way back in the year 2010 and after a lapse of one year these review petitions have been filed which is groundless, therefore, further time be not granted to the applicant to comply with the order(s) passed by this Court.
3.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, time upto 31.03.2019 is extended to comply with the order passed by this Court on 13.10.2017 and subsequent orders.
4.
The review petitions are accordingly dismissed with the above-stated observation/direction as contained in para-3 of this order. No cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K.Agrawal) Judge B/-