1 2025:CGHC:7043 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 437 of 2020 Smt. Bageshwari Devi W/o Shri Rajesh Kumar Patel Aged About 39 Years Caste Kunsi, Village Patrapali, Post Patra Pali, P.S. Ramanuj Nagar District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. Thumari Bai Wd/o Moti Aged About 70 Years Caste - Kenwat, R/o Village Saraswatipur, P.S. Vishrampur, Tehsil And District Surajpur Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 2. Narendra Narayan Pandey S/o Lalmani Pandey Aged About 38 Years Caste - Brahmin, R/o Mishra Gali, Bhaiyathan Road, Tehsil And District Surajpur Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 3. Vishwakarma Bhagat S/o Late Kamaldev Bhagat Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Ramnagar, P.S. Vishrampur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 4. Kameshwar Kenwat S/o Kenduram @ Mangalram Kenwat Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Saraswatipur, P.S. Vishrampur, Tehsil And District Surajpur Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 5. Samendra Aged About 35 Years Occupation Agriculture, R/o Village Saraswatipur, P.S. Vishrampur, Tehsil And District Surajpur Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 6. Nandlal S/o Sonu Kenwat Aged About 75 Years Caste - Kenwat, Village Saraswatipur, P.S. Surajpur, Tehsil And District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 7. Tamasram S/o Nandlal Caste - Kenwat, Village Saraswatipur, P.S. Surajpur, Tehsil And District Surajpur Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 2 8. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector Surajpur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aman Upadhyay, Advocate For State/ Respondent No. 8 : Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 07/02/2025 1) Petitioner/ defendant No. 7 has filed this petition challenging the order dated 07.02.2020 whereby the application moved by the plaintiff under Order 23 Rule 1 of CPC was allowed and suit was dismissed as withdrawn. 2) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned trial Court ought to have afforded opportunity of hearing to defendants before deciding the application moved by plaintiff, thus, the order dated 07.02.2020 is bad in law and deserves to be quashed. 3) On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes. 4) Heard. 5) Taking into consideration the fact that every person who files a suit/ petition/ application before any Court or forum has right to withdraw the same. Withdrawal would amount to acquiescence or waiver of his right and respondent or defendant does not require any opportunity before deciding such application. 6) Consequently, the instant petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Ajinkya