Chattisgarh High Court
Mamta Modi vs Devprasad Kesharwani 46 Mcrc/211/2019 ... on 10 January, 2019
Author: Sanjay K. Agrawal
Bench: Sanjay K. Agrawal
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Writ Petition (Art. 227) No.863 of 2018
1. Mamta Modi, W/o Manoj Modi, Aged about 45 years,
2. Atul Modi, S/o Manoj Modi, Aged about 25 years,
3. Manoj Modi, S/o Chaturbhuj Modi, Aged about 50 years,
All R/o Bhoghapara, Sivrinarayan, Tah. Navagarh, District Janjgir-
Champa (C.G.)
(Defendant No. 1 to 3)
---- Petitioners
Versus
1. Devprasad Kesharwani, S/o Bhagprasad Kesharwani, Aged about 70
years, Through Special Power of Attorney Holder Vishnu Kesharwani,
S/o Devprasad Kesharwani, Aged about 38 years, R/o Mahantpara,
Sivrinarayan, Tah. Navagarh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
(Plaintiff)
2. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Collector, Janjgir, Distt. Janjgir-
Champa (C.G.)
(Def. No.4)
---- Respondents
For Petitioners: Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent No.1: Mr. Aman Kesharwani, Advocate. For Respondent No.2/State: -
Mr. A.N. Bhakta, Deputy Advocate General and Mr. Vimlesh Bajpai, Govt. Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 10/01/2019
1. Heard.
2. By the impugned order, defendants No.1 to 3's application for deleting their names from the suit has been rejected.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners / defendants No.1 to 3 submits that the order impugned is unsustainable and bad in law.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.1 / plaintiff 2 supports the impugned order.
5. The trial Court has clearly recorded a finding that defendants No.1 to 3 are necessary as well as property party to the suit and declined to delete the names of defendants No.1 to 3 in which I do not find any jurisdictional error. The writ petition is liable to be and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to cost(s).
Sd/-
(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Soma