1 2025:CGHC:6054 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP(227) No. 1074 of 2024 1. Smt. Sunita Gupta W/o Shambhu Gupta Aged About 42 Years R/o Balrampur, Tehsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. (Defendant No. 7) 2. Shambhu Gupta S/o Late Murli Gupta Aged About 47 Years R/o Balrampur, Tehsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. (Defendant No. 8) ... Petitioners Versus 1. Deenanath Mishra S/o Late Onkarnath Mishra Aged About 36 Years R/o Village And Post Bakraur, Police Station Bodhgaya, District Gaya (Bihar), At Present R/o Jabar, Post And Tehsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. (Plaintiff) 2. Smt. Parvati W/o Late Onkarnath Mishra Aged About 68 Years R/o Village And Post Bakraur, Police Station Bodhgaya, District Gaya (Bihar), At Present R/o Jabar, Post And Tehsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. (Plaintiff) 3. Smt. Ratna Devi W/o Arunkumar Pandey Aged About 53 Years R/o Bangali Para, Jugsalai, Jamshedpur, (Jharkhand) 4. Smt. Rekha Devi W/o Vijay Kumar Pathak Aged About 44 Years R/o Village Suktara, Post Thakurai, Parsiya, Police Station Nasriganj, District Rohtas (Bihar) 5. Smt. Sulekha Pathak W/o Suresh Pathak Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Harla, Degadih, Police Station Devri, District Girdih (Jharkhand) 6. Smt. Chandrawati Devi W/o Sunil Kumar Mishra Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Bramhan Bigha, Fulwariya Bateri, Police Station Garuwa, District Gaya (Bihar) 7. Smt. Anuradha Vaidh W/o Virendra Kumar Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Baidhbigta, Post Maltara, District Aurangabad (Jharkhand) 8. Gopal Krishna Mishra S/o Late Ramapati Mishra Aged About 62 Years R/o Village Jabar, Post And Tehsil Balrampur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj, C.G. (Respondent/defendant No 1) 9. Radhakrishna S/o Late Ramapati Mishra Aged About 62 Years R/o Village Jabar, Post And Tehsil Balrampur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj, C.G. (Respondent/defendant No 2) 10. Vivekanand Mishra S/o Late Ramapati Mishra Aged About 57 Years R/o Village Jabar, Post And Tehsil Balrampur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj, C.G. (Respondent/defendant No 3) 11. Aditya Kumar Singh S/o Anuj Sharan Singh Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Mangarhara, Police Station And Tehsil Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. (Respondent/defendant No 4) Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI 2 12. Prithvi Singh S/o Devbansh Singh Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Tangarmahri, Ghasiya Dohar, Post And Tehsil Ambikapur, District Surguja, C.G. (Respondent/defendant No. 5) 13. Brajesh Sahu S/o Heeralal Sahu Aged About 45 Years R/o Nagar Ambikapur Darripara, Post And Tehsil Ambikapur, District Surguja, C.G. (Respondent/defendant No. 6) 14. Smt. Usha Gupta W/o Rsamsewak Gupta Aged About 56 Years R/o Ramanujganj Warrd No. 01, Ring Road, Post And Tehsil Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. (Respondent/defendant No. 10) 15. Muni Lal Gupta S/o Nathuni Sao Aged About 38 Years R/o Sohdag Khurdakh, Post Nawa Bajar, Police Station Bishrampur, District Palamu (Jharkhand) (Respondent/defendant No. 11) 16. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Balrampur, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. (Respondent/defendant No. 9) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners/Defendants No. 7 and 8 : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 & 2 : Mr. Bhupendra Singh, Advocate For Respondent No. 16/State : Mr. Prateek Tiwari, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 03/02/2025 1. Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the civil suit for declaration of title and injunction preferred by the plaintiffs/respondents No. 1 and 2 was decreed in favour of the plaintiffs/respondents No. 1 and 2 vide judgment and decree dated 09.05.2024. He would contend that an application under Order 41 Rule 5 of CPC along with the memo of appeal was preferred before the learned first appellate Court and the application for grant of stay was rejected vide order dated 06.11.2024. He would further submit that the petitioners preferred this petition against the said order and the interim order was passed in favour of the petitioners on 25.11.2024 which is still operative. Mr. Manoj Paranjpe would also submit that the appeal is set for final hearing before the learned first appellate Court on 01.03.2025, therefore, this petition may be disposed of with a direction 3 to the concerned Court to make all endeavors to decide the pending appeal on that particular date. 2. On the other hand, Mr. Bhupendra Singh, learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 1 and 2 would oppose. He would submit that the application moved by defendants No. 7 and 8 under Order 41 Rule 5 of CPC was rejected. He would further submit that as the case is set for final hearing before the Court below on 01.03.2025, a suitable direction may be issued to the concerned Court to decide the matter on that date. 3. Mr. Prateek Tiwari, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State, would support the order passed by the Court below. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. Taking into consideration the fact that the mater is fixed for final hearing before the first appellate Court on 01.03.2025, I am not inclined to interfere with the merits of the case, therefore, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the concerned Court to make all endeavors to hear the matter finally on 01.03.2025 and pass an appropriate order on the merits of the case. 6. The parties are directed to maintain the status quo till the final decision of the appeal. 7. Consequently, the petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti