1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1697 of 2025 1 - Jaikishan Jakhodia S/o Lt. Purushhottam Jakhodia Aged About 67 Years At - Samta Colony, P/s - Azad Chowk, Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Ashish Didwaniya S/o Shri Sitaram Aged About 42 Years R/o At - Choubey Colony, Raipur, Tehsil And District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Gurpreet Singh Aged About 44 Years R/o At- Vaishali Nagar, Bhilai, Tehsil And District- Durg (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Vinay Nagdev, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 03.04.2025 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “1. The Court may kindly be pleased to pass appropriate writ(s)/order(s) and quash the order of P/1 dated 10.02.2025 passed by the Ld. Board of Revenue, Circuit Court, Raipur, C.G., in case no. RN/05/R-A- VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 70/021/2025, and consequently prohibit respondent no. 01 from furnishing additional evidence/statement under Order 18 Rule 4 CPC in the proceedings pending before the Naib Tehsildar, Tehsil Ahiwara, Dhamdha, District Durg, C.G., titled as "Ashish Didwaniya vs Jaikishan Jakhodia & Anr.", numbered 202206102800034/अ-70/2021-22 in the interest of justice. 2. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the record of proceedings pending before the Naib Tehsildar, Tehsil Ahiwara, Dhamdha, District Durg, C.G., titled as "Ashish Didwaniya vs Jaikishan Jakhodia & Anr.", numbered 202206102800034/अ-70/2021-22 adjudication of the case. for just and proper. 3. Any other relief/direction that the Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a proceeding under Section 250 of the Land Revenue Code was initiated by the concerned Tehsildar on the application filed by the respondent No. 1 in which the entire evidence has been recorded on behalf of the respondent No. 1 and the case was at the verge of final orders, however, in the meanwhile on 18.05.2023, the respondent No. 1 has filed an application stating that he could not adduce evidence, as such, he may be allowed to give evidence in this respect. The 3 Tehsildar has allowed the said application. It is stated that the petitioner is aggrieved by the said order passed by the Tehsildar, as such, he has filed an appeal before the concerned Additional Collector and thereafter, the Additional Collector has dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner. Again, the petitioner has filed a Revision before the Commissioner and thereafter Board of Revenue and all the revenue Courts have passed order against the petitioner. 4. I have gone through the order passed by the Board of Revenue and from perusal of this order, I do not find anything which can be required to be interfered with by this Court. Time and again, the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as other Courts have stated that the principles of natural justice is to be followed and one cannot be deprived of adducing his/her evidence. In view of the above, this Court does not find any good ground for indulgence under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. Accordingly, the petition filed by the petitioner fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha