Holiram Chandravanshi vs Fekan Bai
2023 Latest Caselaw 528 Chatt

                     HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                          SA No. 69 of 2022

        Holiram Chandravanshi S/o Dhanush Chandravanshi, Aged About 55 Years R/o
         Village Gandaikhurd, Tahsil Bodla, District Kabirdham Chhattisgrh.
                                                                                    ---- Appellant
                                                  Versus
       1. Fekan Bai W/o Lakhn Kurmi, Aged About 57 Years R/o Village Jinda, Tahsil
          Kawardha, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.
       2. State Of Chhattisgarh,          Through    Collector,   Kawardha,   District   Kabirdham
          Chhattisgarh.
                                                                                 ---- Respondent

25.01.2023 Shri Ajit Singh, Advocate appears along with Shri Bhupendra Shrivas,

counsel for the Appellant.

Shri Sanjeev Kumar Agrawal, Panel Lawyer for the State/ Respondent No.2.

Heard on admission.

This appeal is admitted on the following substantial question of law:

Whether finding of the lower appellate court holding that the Plaintiff's(Holiram) suit for general partition and injunction suffers from the principles of res-judicata under Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short the CPC), despite the fact that a right to institute a suit for general partition was provided to him (purchaser- Holiram) vide judgment dated 31.07.2012(Ex.P-7) passed in Second Appeal No.01/1993 "Holiram Vs. Smt. Phekanbai and Anr.", coupled with the rejection of objection of Defendant No.1 (Phekanbai) to this effect vide order dated 27.02.2017 in Civil Revision No.152/2016 "Phekanbai Vs. Holiram and Anr.", is perverse?

Issue notice to Respondent No. 1 only, on payment of P.F. as per rules.

Learned counsel for the Appellant is directed to supply the substantial question of law as framed to the counsel for Respondent No. 2 within a period of 15

days from today.

Also heard on I.A.No.2/2022, an application filed on 18.01.2022 under Order

39 Rule 1 and 2 of the C.P.C.

Issue notice to Respondent No.1 on this application also, as above.

Meanwhile, purely as an interim measure, it is directed that Respondent

No.1- Phekanbai shall not create any third party interest with regard to the property

in question till the next date of hearing.

In view of above, Shri Ajit Singh, learned counsel for the Appellant does not

want to press the application, marked as I.A.No.1/2022 filed on the same day under

Order 39 Rule 3(A) of the CPC.

The said application is accordingly rejected and disposed of.

Post this matter after 5 weeks for consideration on I.A.No.2/2022.

Sd/-

(Sanjay S. Agrawal) Judge

sunita