1 2025:CGHC:34699 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 460 of 2020 1. Radhelal S/o Genduram Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Nawagaon, Police Station Parpodi, Tahsil Saja, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh, District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh 2. Sevti W/o Bholaram Aged About 42 Years D/o Genduram, R/o Village Dalsatola, Post And Tahsil Sahaspur Lohara, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. Keshav Ram Sahu S/o Late Premlal Sahu Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Siheti, Police Station And Tahsil Sahaspur Lohara, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh 2. Pammi Bai Sahu W/o Keshav Ram Sahu Aged About 31 Years R/o Village Siheti, Police Station And Tahsil Sahaspur Lohara, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh Present R/o Police Station And Tahsil Sahaspur Lohara, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh 3. Bhupesh Ram Sahu S/o Keshav Ram Sahu Aged About 8 Years Respondent No. 03, Through Their Legal Guardian Namely Pammi Bai Sahu W/o Keshav Ram Sahu, R/o Village Siheti, Police Station And Tahsil Sahaspur Lohara, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh Present R/o Police Station And Tahsil Sahaspur Lohara, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh 4. Goverdhan Sahu S/o Keshav Ram Sahu Aged About 5 Years Respondent No. 04, Through Their Legal Guardian Namely Pammi Bai Sahu W/o Keshav Ram Sahu, R/o Village Siheti, Police Station And Tahsil Sahaspur Lohara, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh Present R/o Police Station And Tahsil Sahaspur Lohara, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh 5. Genduram S/o Late Kaliram Sahu Aged About 75 Years R/o Village Siheti, Police Station And Tahsil Sahaspur Lohara, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Vaibhav A. Goverdhan, Advocate SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2025.07.22 15:08:39 +0530 2 For Respondents : Mr. C.K. Sahu, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 21. 07.2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioners have sought the following relief(s):- “10.1 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, direction/directions, order/orders quashing the impugned order dated 23.06.2019 passed by the learned Lok-Adalat, Division Bench no. 2, Family Court Kabirdham (C.G.), passed in Miscellaneous Criminal case No. 236/2019, (Annex. P-1) in the interest of justice. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s), which is deemed fit and proper in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that an application under Section 125 of the CrPC was moved by respondents No. 2 to 4 against respondent No. 1 for the grant of maintenance. He would further submit that Genduram, who is the grandfather of respondent No. 1, appeared before the learned Family Court and settled the dispute; consequently, 1.8089 hectares of land out of 1.933 hectares was given to respondents No. 2 to 4 in lieu of maintenance. He would also submit that Radhelal/petitioner No. 1 and Sevati Bai/petitioner No. 2 are son and daughter of Genduram, and they have equal rights over the property recorded in the name of Genduram. He would contend that without their consent and knowledge, the property was given to respondents No. 2 to 4. He would further contend that in the compromise order, it is also observed that respondent No. 1 would reside along with respondents No. 2 to 4, and thus, there was collusion between respondents No. 1 and 2. He would pray to set aside the compromise order passed in the Mega Lok Adalat, Bench No. 2, Family Court, Kabirdham, dated 23.06.2019. 3 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 5 would oppose. He would submit that there was a partition between Radhelal, Premlal and Genduram. He would further submit that 1.889 hectares of land out of 1.933 hectares was given to respondents No. 2 to 4 from the share of Genduram, and the petitioners have no right to claim title over such part of the property. He would also submit that the petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on the record. 5. Admittedly, the respondents have not filed any document to establish the fact that there was any partition between Genduram, Radhelal & Premlal. It appears that out of 1.933 hectares of land, 1.889 hectares of land were given to respondents No. 2 to 4 in a proceeding initiated under Section 125 of CrPC in lieu of maintenance. Perusal of the documents filed by the petitioner would show that most of the property has already been given to respondents No. 2 to 4, whereas the petitioners have the right over the property, and this fact could not be brought within the knowledge of the learned Court below. 6. Genduram also appeared before the learned Family Court and made a statement in favour of respondents No. 2 to 4; further, respondents No. 1 and 2 to 4 have decided to reside jointly which shows that there was a collusion between the parties; therefore, the order dated 23.06.2019 passed by the learned Mega Lok Adalat, Bench No. 2, Family Court, Kabirdham is hereby set-aside. Accordingly, the instant petition is hereby allowed. 7. The matter is remitted back to the Family Court, Kabirdham, to decide it afresh after affording a due opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, 4 respondents No. 1 to 5 and other stakeholders. 8. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Family Court, Kabirdham on 6th August, 2025. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge $iddhant