1 2025:CGHC:27655 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 744 of 2021 1 - Narayan Sahu S/o Sukhram Aged About 60 Years R/o Sisdevri, Taluka, Palari, District Balodabazar Bhatapara (Chhattisgarh), 2 - Uderam S/o Sukhram Aged About 57 Years R/o Sisdevri, Taluka, Palari, District Balodabazar Bhatapara (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Kishnu S/o Sukhram Aged About 54 Years R/o Sisdevri, Taluka, Palari, District Balodabazar Bhatapara (Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioners Versus 1 - Shambati Sahu D/o Sukhi Ram Sahu, Aged About 75 Years R/o Sisdevri, Taluka, Palari, District Balodabazar Bhatapara (Chhattisgarh) 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector Balodabazar, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. A.S. Rajput, Advocate For Respondent No.1 For Respondent No. 2/State : Mr. Dashrath Kushwaha, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. P.K. Patel, Advocate Mr. Shubham Bajpai, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 25/06/2025 1. The petitioners have filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- 10.i That, this Hon’ble court may kindly be pleased to set aside the order dated 28.10.2021 (Annexure P-3) passed by 1st Civil Judge, Class-I, Balodabazar District Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.) in Civil Suit No. CJ/40/2016. Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2025.06.26 12:08:36 +0530 2 10.ii Cost of the petition may also be allowed by this Hon’ble Court. 10.iii Any other relief / reliefs which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be allowed. 2. Mr. A.S. Rajput, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would argue that Civil Suit No. 40/2016 was filed by respondent No. 1 for declaration of title, partition, possession and permanent injunction. He would further submit that an application was moved by respondent No.1 under Order 23 Rule 1 of CPC for withdrawal of the suit on 27.02.2020 and it was rejected by the learned trial Court. He would contend that respondent No.1 assigning the same reasons, moved the same application under Order 23 Rule 1 of CPC for withdrawal of the suit and that application was allowed by the learned trial Court vide order dated 28.10.2021. He would also submit that the repeat application was not maintainable. He would pray to set aside the order and to allow the petition. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Dashrath Kushwaha, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 and Mr. Shubham Bajpai, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for respondent No. 2 would oppose. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. A suit was filed by respondent No.1 before the learned trial Court. The plaintiff abandoned his right and moved an application under Order 23 Rule 1 of CPC to withdraw the civil suit under Order 23 Rule 1 of CPC and it was rejected by the learned trial Court vide order dated 27.02.2020. Later on, he moved another application and sought prayer for withdrawal of the suit and it was allowed. 3 6. Admittedly, no adverse order has been passed by the learned trial Court against the petitioners, therefore, the contention made by Mr. A.S. Rajput appears to be misconceived. The litigant who files a matter before any Court has an equal right to withdraw such proceeding or application except Public Interest Litigation and Election Petition. Therefore, in my opinion, no case is made out for interference. 7. Consequently, the petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No costs. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti