Smt. Pratima vs Smt. Balmani
2022 Latest Caselaw 3892 Chatt

             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                               SA No. 300 of 2021
    Smt. Pratima, W/o Govind Ram, Aged About 42 Years, Caste Dhurva, R/o Village
    Bastar Tehsil Bastar District Bastar Chhattisgarh.
                                                                       ---- Appellant
                                     Versus
 1. Smt. Balmani, W/o Dinbandhu, Aged About 37 Years, Caste Dhurva, R/o
    Pathragudha, Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh.
 2. Smt. Sajmani W/o Mahesh Aged About 27 Years Caste Dhurva, R/o Village
    Bastar, Tehsil Bastar, District Bastar Chhattisgarh.
 3. State of Chhattisgarh Through Collector Bastar Tehsil Jagdalpur District Bastar
    Chhattisgarh.
 4. Bhagatram S/o Lykhan Aged About 30 Years Caste Dhruva, R/o Village
    Deourgaon, Tehsil Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh.
 5. Bhudhram S/o Lykhan Aged About 19 Years Caste Dhruva, R/o Village
    Deourgaon, Tehsil Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh.
 6. Sonmati W/o Kamal Sai Aged About 34 Years Caste Dhurva, R/o Chingpal, Tehsil
    Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh.
 7. Nila W/o Raghunath Aged About 32 Years Caste Dhurva, R/o Village Chillputty
    Tehsil Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh.
 8. Radma W/o Ramprasad Aged About 28 Years Caste Dhurva, R/o Village
    Patraguda, Jagdalpur, Tehsil Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh.
 9. Paro 10 Years, G.A.D. Bhagatram D/o Lykhan, Aged 30 Years, Caste Dhruva,
    R/o Village Deourgaon, Tehsil Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh.
 10. Smt. Ratna Kashyap W/o G. Kashyap Aged About 36 Years Caste Gond, R/o
     Village Adhanpur, Tehsil Jagdalpur District Bastar Chhattisgarh.
                                                                    ---- Respondents

20.06.2022 Mr. Ashish Surana, Advocate for the Appellant.

Mr. Ravi Maheshwari, PL for the State/respondent No.3.

The appeal is arguable and admitted for hearing on the following substantial question of law;-

1 "Whether the first Appellate Court was justified in reversing the finding with regard to the fact that plaintiff's husband was residing in his in- laws house as Gharjamai, though the trial Court has recorded the finding that there is custom of having Gharjamai, in the Dhurva caste?.

2. Whether the trial Court was justified in accepting counter claim filed by the defendant No.1 without deciding objection with regard to the Court fees raised by the plaintiff?.

Issue notice to the respondents on payment of PF by ordinary as well as registered mode.

PF be paid within 10 days.

Heard on I.A. No. 01/2021 under Order XLI Rule 5 CPC.

Taking into consideration the submission made by counsel for the appellant it is ordered that the judgment and decree passed by the First Appellate Court shall remain stayed till final disposal of the appeal.

A copy of this order along with notice be sent to the respondents. List this case for final hearing in the third week of August, 2022.

Sd/-

(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge

Santosh