1 2025:CGHC:47876 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 896 of 2025 1 - Smt. Mamta Dadsena Wife Of Shri Ashwani Dadsena Aged About 45 Years Resident Of Amarpuri, Chowk, Sunder Nagar, Raipur Tahsil And District- Raipur Chhattisgarh, ... Petitioner versus 1 - Mahesh Ram Sahu Son Of Shri Ramdayal Aged About 60 Years Resident Of Village Bhothali, Post Pohanda, Tahsil- Patan, District- Durg Chhattisgarh, 2 - Ravindra Sahu Son Of Shri Kamal Sahu Aged About 49 Years Resident Of Ballabh Nagar, C-149, Pachpedi Naka, Raipur, Tahsil And District- Raipur Chhattisgarh, 3 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector District- Durg Chhattisgarh, 4 - Smt. Pinki Agrawal Wife Of Shri Kailash Chandra Agrawal Aged About 40 Years Resident Of A-303, Daldal Sivni, Kul Homes, Ward No.27, Mova Saddu, Raipur Chhattisgarh, 5 - Kailaschandra Agrawal Son Of Late Anganaram Agrawal Aged About 46 Years Resident Of A-303, Daldal Sivni, Kul Homes, Ward No.27, Mova Saddu, Raipur Chhattisgarh, 6 - Bisan Kumar Agrawal Son Of Late Chandagi Ram Agrawal Aged About 56 Years Resident Of Purani Basti, Ward No.09, Katabhanji District- Balangir Orissa, 7 - Pradeep Kumar Agrawal Son Of Late Bhajan Lal Agrawal Aged About 46 Years Resident Of Road No.2, Ward No.03, Katabhanji, District- Balangir Orissa, ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. C. R. Sahu, Advocate For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Vedant Shadangi, PL For Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 : Mr. Vinay Nagdev, appeared through VC Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order On Board 17.09.2025 1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 13.08.2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bhilai- 3 District- Durg in Civil Suit No. 2 32-A/2018, whereby the right of the petitioner/plaintiff to lead evidence was closed. 2. The subject matter in brief is that the petitioner/plaintiff instituted Civil Suit No. 32-A/2018 before the learned Civil Judge, Class-I, Bhilai-3, District Durg (C.G.) seeking declaration, injunction, and to declare null and void the registered sale deeds dated 04.03.2014 and 25.03.2014 executed in respect of land bearing Khasra No. 355 area 1.30 hectares and Khasra No. 354 area 1.00 hectare, total 2.30 hectares, situated at Village Bhothali, P.H. No. 04, Revenue Circle Bhilai, District Durg. He had earlier purchased the said land from the defendants through registered sale deeds dated 28.10.2013 and 07.11.2013, paid full consideration, and has since been in peaceful possession and cultivating crops thereon. Despite this, defendant No. 1, relying only on revenue records, illegally executed subsequent sale deeds in favour of defendant No. 2 on 04.03.2014 and 25.03.2014, leading to the filing of the present suit. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff submits that the matter was fixed on 13.08.2025 for recording his evidence. On the said date, the son of the petitioner had undergone surgery and, therefore, the petitioner could not appear before the trial Court till 2:50 p.m. It is submitted that by that time the trial Court closed the petitioner’s right to lead evidence. However, at about 3:00 p.m., the petitioner and his witnesses appeared before the Court, which fact is also noted in the order of the trial Court, yet their statements were not recorded. It is further submitted that if an opportunity is not granted, the petitioner would suffer irreparable loss and prejudice. 4. Learned counsel for respondents No. 4 to 7 submits that one opportunity may be granted to the petitioner, subject to payment of costs, and the trial Court 3 may also be directed to expedite the trial in view of the long pendency of the civil suit. 5. Learned counsel for the State submits that the lis is essentially between the petitioner/plaintiff and respondents No. 4 to 7, as respondents No. 1 to 3 have only been formally impleaded. 6. Be that as it may, after hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned order deserves to be set aside. Accordingly, the order dated 13.08.2025 is quashed and the petitioner/plaintiff is permitted to lead his evidence on the next date of hearing before the learned trial Court. On that date, the petitioner/plaintiff shall ensure the presence of all his witnesses for recording of their statements. The aforesaid liberty is granted subject to the payment of costs of Rs. 5,000/- to be paid to respondents No. 4 to 7. 7. In view of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of. Considering the pendency of the matter, it is expected that the learned trial Court shall make all endeavours to expedite the trial, subject to cooperation by the parties. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge H.Ansari HIFZURRAHMAN ANSARI Digitally signed by HIFZURRAHMAN ANSARI Date: 2025.09.24 15:48:24 +0530