Ramendra Nath Sarkhel (Since Dead) ... vs Rafiq Ahmad Khan (Since Dead) Through ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 3265 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Ramendra Nath Sarkhel (Since Dead) ... vs Rafiq Ahmad Khan (Since Dead) Through ... on 25 June, 2025

                                                1




Digitally signed
by RAMESH
KUMAR VATTI                                                     2025:CGHC:27657
Date: 2025.06.26
12:07:21 +0530                                                                 NAFR

                   HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                WP227 No. 624 of 2021
1 - Ramendra Nath Sarkhel (Since Dead) Through His Legal Heirs
1.1 - Udayan Sarkhel S/o Late Shri R. N. Sarkhel Aged About 51 Years R/o
House No. 5, Akbar Khan Ki Chaal, Juni Line, Bilaspur, Tehsil And District
Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.
1.2 - Diganto Sarkhel S/o Late Shri R. N. Sarkhel Aged About 49 Years R/o
House No. 5, Akbar Khan Ki Chaal, Juni Line, Bilaspur, Tehsil And District
Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.
                                                                          ... Petitioners
                                            Versus
1 - Rafiq Ahmad Khan (Since Dead) Through His Legal Heirs
1.1 - Smt. Suraiya Begum W/o Late Shri Rafiq Ahmed Khan Aged About 75
Years R/o Flat No. 113, Utkarsh Nirman, Mangalwari Bazar, Sadar, Nagpur,
Maharashtra.
1.2 - Juber Ahmed Khan S/o Late Shri Rafiq Ahmed Khan Aged About 61
Years R/o Flat No. 113, Utkarsh Nirman, Mangalwari Bazar, Sadar, Nagpur,
Maharashtra.
1.3 - Sameer Ahmed Khan S/o Late Shri Rafiq Ahmed Khan Aged About 48
Years R/o Flat No. 113, Utkarsh Nirman, Mangalwari Bazar, Sadar, Nagpur,
Maharashtra.
                                                                       ... Respondents

For Petitioners : Mr. Yashkaran Singh, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Amrito Das, Advocate

For Respondents : Mr. Faiz Kazi, Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 25/06/2025

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the

petitioner/judgment debtor has preferred an appeal according to the

provisions of Section 96 of CPC alongwith an application for grant of

stay which is pending consideration before the First Additional District

Judge, Bilaspur since 09.09.2021. He would contend that a direction

may issued to the concerned Court to decide the pending appeal

expeditiously.

2. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents would oppose.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

4. Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by learned counsel

for the petitioners, this petition, at this juncture, is disposed of with a

direction to the concerned Court to decide the pending appeal of the

petitioners expeditiously preferably within a period of 90 days from the

date of receipt of copy of this order.

5. As interim order is operating in favour of the petitioner, same shall

remain in force for said period.

Sd/-

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

vatti