Kapil Narayan Tamrakar vs Hari Kumar Tamrakar
2023 Latest Caselaw 504 Chatt

                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                      FA No. 23 of 2017
     Kapil Narayan Tamrakar S/o Late Lakhan Lal Tamrakar, Aged About 55 Years R/o Badi
      Bazar Ratanpur, Police Station Ratanpur, Tahsil Kota, Civil And Revenue District
      Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ..............Defendant No.2, Chhattisgarh
                                                                                    ---- Appellant
                                            Versus
   1. Hari Kumar Tamrakar S/o Late Lakhan Lal Tamrakar, Aged About 50 Years Through
      Power Off Attorney Holder Smt. Nisha Tamrakar W/o Harikumar Tamrakar, R/o Badi
      Bazar Ratanpur, Police Station Ratanpur, Tahsil Kota, Civil And Revenue District
      Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ...............Plaintiff, Chhattisgarh
   2. Smt. Durga Tamrakar W/o Jagdish Tamrakar, Aged About 32 Years R/o Uchehara, Police
      Station And Tahsil- Maihar, Civil And Revenue District Satna M.P.
   3. Harishankar Tamrakar S/o Late Lakhan Lal Tamrakar, Aged About 45 Years R/o Badi
      Bazar Ratanpur, Police Station Ratanpur, Tahsil Kota, Civil And Revenue District
      Bilaspur
   4. Sudarshan Tamrakar S/o Late Lakhan Lal Tamrakar, Aged About 35 Years R/o Badi
      Bazar Ratanpur, Police Station Ratanpur, Tahsil Kota, Civil And Revenue District
      Bilaspur
   5. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Collector, Bilaspur, Police Station Civil Lines, Tahsil, Civil
      And Revenue District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh .................Defendants, District : Bilaspur,
      Chhattisgarh
                                                                               ----Respondents

24.01.2023 Shri Ratnesh Kumar Agrawal, counsel for the Appellant.

Shri Karan Kumar Baharani, counsel for Respondent No.1.

Shri P.K. Tulsyan, counsel for Respondent Nos. 2 to 4.

Shri Ravi Pal Maheshwari, Panel Lawyer for the State/ Respondent

No.5.

Heard on I.A.No.1/2017, an application filed under Order 41 Rule 5 of

the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, praying for staying the effect and operation

of the impugned judgment and decree dated 22.12.2016 passed in Civil Suit

No.98-A/2014.

On due consideration, the application is allowed and it is directed that

the effect and operation of the impugned judgment and decree dated

22.12.2016 passed by the 6 th Additional District Judge, Bilaspur(CG) in Civil

Suit No.98-A/2014 shall remain stayed until further orders, in so far as delivery

of vacant possession of the suit property marked as red colour in plaint

Schedule 'A' is concerned, subject to the Appellant's furnishing security

amount of Rs.25,000/- before the concerned trial Court within a period of sixty

days from today.

I.A.No. 1/2017 stands disposed of.

Also heard on I.A.No.2/2022, an application filed by Shri P.K. Tulsyan

for urgent hearing of this appeal.

Shri P.K. Tulsyan does not want to press this application as the same

has been filed inadvertently by him.

The application is accordingly rejected as not pressed and disposed of.

Post this matter after three weeks for consideration on I.A.No.3/2022

filed by Respondent No.1 for early hearing of this appeal.

Sd/-

(Sanjay S. Agrawal) Judge

sunita