Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 10412 (CHH)

SHYAM NARAYAN PANDEY v. SHANKAR PRASAD SONI

MCC/253/2025 · 2025-03-11

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:12030 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 253 of 2025  Shyam Narayan Pandey S/o Late Ramkripal Pandey Aged About 58 Years R/o Deviganj Road, In Front Of Jaiswal Chitra Mandir Ambikapur, P.S. And Tahsil Ambikapur, District- Surguja, C.G. (Plaintiff No. 1) ... Applicant(s) versus 1. Shankar Prasad Soni S/o Late Mathura Ram Soni Aged About 61 Years Caste Sonar, R/o Deviganj Road, In Front Of Jaiswal Chitra Mandir Ambikapur, P.S. And Tahsil Ambikapur District Surguja, C.G. (Defendant) 2. Smt. Shanti Soni W/o Shankar Prasad Soni Aged About 56 Years Caste Sonar, R/o Deviganj Road, In Front Of Jaiswal Chitra Mandir Ambikapur, P.S. And Tahsil Ambikapur District Surguja, C.G. (Defendant) 3. Rahul Soni S/o Shankar Prasad Soni Aged About 29 Years Caste Sonar, R/o Deviganj Road, In Front Of Jaiswal Chitra Mandir Ambikapur, P.S. And Tahsil Ambikapur District Surguja, C.G. (Defendant) 4. Smt. Poonam Nagdev W/o Ashok Kumar Nagdev Aged About 50 Years R/o Shivam Palace In Front Of Jaiswal Chitra Mandir, P.S. And Tahsil Ambikapur District Surguja, C.G. (Defendant) 5. Sudhir Kumar Pandey S/o Late Deendayal Pandey Aged About 37 Years R/o Deviganj Road, In Front Of Jaiswal Chitra Mandir Ambikapur, P.S. And Tahsil Ambikapur District Surguja, C.G. (Plaintiff No 2) ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Ashok Kumar Shukla, Advocate For Non-Applicant No. 3 : Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 11. 03.2025 1. By way of the instant MCC, the applicant has sought for modification in the SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2025.03.12 18:21:43 +0530 2 order dated 30.01.2025, passed in WP227 No. 110 of 2025 by this Court. 2. Upon perusal of the order dated 30.01.2025, it is apparent that there is typographical error in para 2, wherein the phrase “Khasra No. 434/3” was inadvertently used instead of “Khasra No. 534/3”. 3. In the light of the aforementioned typographical error, the order dated 30.01.2025, passed in WP227 No. 110 of 2025 is hereby modified and the phrase “Khasra No. 434/3” mentioned in the paragraph 2 of the said order is rectified and shall now be read as “Khasra No. 534/3”. 4. It is made clear that rest of the contents of the original order [ WP227 No. 110 of 2025 dated 30.01.2025 ] shall remain intact. 5. With this modification(s), the instant MCC is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge $iddhant