Vifal Singh vs Sukhli Bai
2025 Latest Caselaw 3264 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Vifal Singh vs Sukhli Bai on 25 June, 2025

                                             1




Digitally signed
by RAMESH
                                                                 2025:CGHC:27658
KUMAR VATTI
Date: 2025.06.26                                                            NAFR
12:05:10 +0530

                   HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                 WP227 No. 533 of 2021
1 - Vifal Singh S/o Jagarnath Singh Aged About 52 Years Caste - Gond,
Occupation - Cultivator, R/o Village Kamalpur, Police Station - Surajpur, Tahsil
- Ramanujnagar, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh
                                                                  ... Petitioner
                                           Versus
1 - Sukhli Bai D/o Jaypal Aged About 55 Years Caste - Kumhar, Occupation -
Cultivator, R/o Village Kamalpur, Police Station - Surajpur, Tahsil -
Ramanujnagar, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh

2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Surajpur, District : Surajpur,
Chhattisgarh
                                                            ... Respondents

For Petitioner/defendant No.1 : Mr. D.N. Prajapati, Advocate

For Respondent No. 1/Plaintiff : Mr. Gyan Prakash Shukla, Advocate

For Respondent No. 2/State : Mr. Lav Sharma, Panel Lawyer

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

25/06/2025

1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):-

10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the record of the case for perusal of this Hon'ble Court.

10.2 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the impugned order dated 28.08.2021 (Annexure P/1) and allow the application under Order 9 Rule 13 of CPC and application for condonation of delay.

10.3 That any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.

2. Mr. D.N. Prajapati, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner/defendant No.1 would submit that an application moved by

the petitioner/defendant No. 1 under Order 9 Rule 13 of CPC was

dismissed by the learned trial Court vide order dated 13.05.2016 and

Misc. Appeal against the said order was also dismissed vide order

dated 28.08.2021. He would contend that the petitioner may be

permitted to prefer an appeal against the judgment and decree passed

by the learned trial Court in Civil Suit No. 176A/2002 dated 23.01.2003

before the Competent Court.

3. On the other hand, Mr. Gyan Prakash Shukla, learned counsel

appearing for respondent No. 1/plaintiff and Mr. Lav Sharma, learned

Panel Lawyer appearing for respondent No. 2/State would oppose.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

documents.

5. Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by Mr. D.N. Prajapati,

this petition, at this juncture, is disposed of reserving liberty in favour

of the petitioner to prefer duly constituted appeal before the competent

Court. It is expected that the concerned Court will decide the

appeal strictly in accordance with law.

6. Certified copy of the impugned order be returned to the counsel for the

petitioner after retaining photocopy of the same.

Sd/-

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

vatti