-1- 2025:CGHC:28685 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 1073 of 2024 1 - Smt. Sonam Agrawal D/o Late Shri Anand Agrawal Aged About 38 Years C/o Amiya Agrawal Near Sai Mandir, Magrachaba Road, Magrachaba, District Baloda Bazaar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Smt. Sandhya Agrawal W/o Late Shri Anand Agrawal Aged About 66 Years R/o Infront Of Krishna Provision Stores, Kamal Colony, Baloda Bazaar, District Baloda Bazaar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Smt. Shiba Agrawal D/o Late Shri Anand Agrawal Aged About 38 Years R/o Infront Of Krishna Provision Stores, Kamal Colony, Baloda Bazaar, District Baloda Bazaar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Dr. D.P. Jaiswal S/o Mannu Lal Jaiswal Aged About 74 Years R/o Quarter No. 04 (A) Street / Gali No. 2, Sector 06, Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Sandip Jaiswal S/o Dr. D.P. Jaiswal Aged About 50 Years R/o Quarter No. 04 (A) Street / Gali No. 2, Sector 06, Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Ramkhilawan Jaiswal S/o Munnulal @ Kholu Jaiswal R/o Lawan, District Balodabazaar, Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 4 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, District Baloda Bazaar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE -2- (Cause Title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Pranjal Agrawal, Advocate For State : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, Panel Lawyer For Respondents No. 1 to 3 : Mr. Vikram Pratap, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 27.06.2025 1) The present petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assailing the order dated 08.11.2024 passed in Civil Suit No. 53A of 2021 by the learned II Civil Judge (Senior Division), Baloda Bazaar, District Baloda Bazaar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh, whereby the application filed by defendants No. 1 to 3 under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) was allowed, and the plaintiffs were restrained from raising construction over the suit property. 2) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners, as plaintiffs, filed a civil suit seeking declaration of title and permanent injunction along with an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC. Initially, the trial Court granted an order of temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiffs vide order dated 10.10.2024. He further submits that subsequently, the defendants filed an application under Section 151 CPC on the ground that the plaintiffs had commenced construction over the suit property, and sought an order restraining them. The said application was allowed by the learned trial Court on 08.11.2024, -3- directing the parties to maintain status quo. Learned counsel submits that the said order is liable to be set aside. 3) On the other hand, Mr. Vikram Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the respondents, submits that although the order of temporary injunction was granted in favour of the plaintiffs, they started raising construction over the suit property. Consequently, the defendants were constrained to move an application under Section 151 CPC, and the learned trial Court, upon considering the facts of the case, rightly passed the order of status quo on 08.11.2024. 4) Mr. Shubham Bajpai, learned counsel, supports the impugned order. 5) Heard learned counsel for the parties. 6) Admittedly, the petitioners filed a civil suit for declaration and permanent injunction, along with an application for temporary injunction, which was allowed by the learned trial Court. However, when the petitioners allegedly started raising construction, an application under Section 151 CPC was filed by the defendants, and the learned trial Court, by order dated 08.11.2024, directed the parties to maintain status quo. 7) It is informed by the parties that the suit is presently fixed for the plaintiffs' evidence. 8) Learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Agrawal, submits that due to the order of status quo, the petitioners are unable to carry out construction, and therefore -4- prays for setting aside the said order. 9) Considering the totality of circumstances, it is directed that the order of status quo shall remain in force for a further period of three months from today. The learned trial Court is directed to conclude proceedings of Civil Suit No. 53A of 2021 within a period of 03 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge NADIM