1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 143 of 2022 1 - Kumari Basant Kumar D/o Late Bairi Singh Aged About 40 Years R/o Khemda, Tahsil Basna, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 2 - Alok Kumar S/o Late Bairi Singh Aged About 34 Years R/o Khemda, Tahsil Basna, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Ghanshyam Singh S/o Kartaar Singh Saluja Aged About 67 Years R/o Basna, Tahsil Mahasamund, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 2 - Balram Tamboli Aged About 38 Years Resident At Present Nayab Tahsildar, Bagbahra, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 3 - Rakesh Khuteshwar Aged About 38 Years Resident Of Police Line Mahasamund, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 4 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Ms. Varsha Sharma, Adv. on behalf of Ms. Sareena Khan, Adv. For State Mr. Topilal Bareth, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 2 07-07-2025 1) By way of this petition, petitioners have challenged the order passed by learned First Additional Civil Judge–Class II, Basna, District–Mahasamund (C.G.) in Civil Suit No. 10-A/2019 dated 27.11.2021 whereby the application moved by petitioners to decide the Issue No. 4 and 5 as preliminary issues has been rejected. 2) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that suit was filed by petitioners [plaintiffs] for declaration of title, permanent injunction and confirmation of possession arising out of Revenue Case No. 77 B/121/ 2018-19 and order passed against them may be nullified. She further submits that respondents [defendants] filed written statement and the learned Trial Court framed five issues issues on 21.01.2020. She contends that an application was moved by plaintiffs to decide Issue No. 4 and 5 as preliminary issues and the learned Trial Court rejected the application whereas suit could have been finally decided while deciding Issue No. 4 and 5. She prays to set aside the order impugned and allow the petition. 3) On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes. 4) Heard. 5) Learned Trial Court on 21.01.2020 framed five issues. Issue No. 4 was framed by the Trial Court with regard to “Non-joinder of parties and its effect” whereas Issue No. 5 was framed with regard to “Valuation of suit and Court Fee”. The learned Trial Court held 3 that these issues can be decided in a full-fledged trial after considering the evidence of parties. 6) Taking into consideration the fact that Issue No. 4 and 5 cannot be decided as preliminary issues and at present, case is fixed for evidence, in my opinion, learned Trial Court rightly rejected the application moved by petitioners. 7) Consequently, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Ajinkya Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2025.07.07 17:41:34 +0530