1 CGHC010248902026 2026:CGHC:29828 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 780 of 2026 1 - Nandkishore Sahu S/o- Bisahu Lal Sahu, Aged About 59 Years R/o- Near Nandu Garage, Ward No. 24, Telipara, Bilaspur, Tehsil And District- Bilaspur (C.G.) (Defendant No. 1 In The Civil Suit) 2.1 - Rajni Sahu W/o- Late Nawal Kishore Sahu Aged About 58 Years Resident Of Near Nandu Garage Ward No.24, Telipara, Tehsil And District- Bilaspur (C.G.) (Legal Heirs Of Original Defendant No. 2 In The Civil Suit Defendant No. 2) 2.2 - Mayank Sahu S/o- Late Nawal Kishore Sahu, Aged About 28 Years Resident Of Near Nandu Garage Ward No.24, Telipara, Tehsil And District- Bilaspur (C.G.) (Legal Heirs Of Original Defendant No. 2 In The Civil Suit Defendant No. 2) 2.3 - Mansi Sahu D/o- Late Nawal Kishore Sahu Aged About 26 Years Resident Of Near Nandu Garage Ward No.24, Telipara, Tehsil And District- Bilaspur (C.G.) (Legal Heirs Of Original Defendant No. 2 In The Civil Suit Defendant No. 2) 3 - Shri Ram Infra Through Its Partner Shri Raghvendra Gupta, S/o- Shri Umashankar Gupta, Aged About 43 Years R/o- House No. A/68, Ayegya Nagar, Bilaspur, Tehsil And District- Bilaspur (C.G.) (Defendant No.3 In The Civil Suit) 2 4 - Pankaj Sachdev S/o- Chandrakant Sachdev, Aged About 43 Years (Partner Shri Ram Infra), R/o- Behind Ajeet Hotel, Medical Complex, Telipara, Bilaspur, Tehsil And District- Bilaspur (C.G.) (Defendant No. 4 In The Civil Suit) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Murlidhar Nebhani S/o- Late Shri Holaram Nebhani, Aged About 68 Years R/o- Kranti Nagar Bilaspur, Tehsil And District- Bilaspur (C.G.) (Plaintiff In The Civil Suit) 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) (Defendant No. 5 In The Civil Suit) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Astha Shukla, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Shobit Koshta, Advocate For Respondent No.2/State : Mr. Siddhant Tiwari, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Order on Board 14/07/2026 This petition has been preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the order dated 16.06.2026 passed by the learned 5th District Judge, Bilaspur in Civil Suit No. 24-A/2024, whereby the learned trial Court directed the concerned Revenue Authorities to undertake demarcation of the suit property bearing Khasra Nos. 841/2 and 842/2, admeasuring 0.71 acres, situated at Village Mopka, Tahsil and District Bilaspur. 3 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, pursuant to the order dated 16.06.2026, the learned trial Court directed demarcation of the suit land bearing Khasra Nos. 841/2 and 842/2, admeasuring 0.71 acres, situated at Village Mopka. However, despite the said direction, the Revenue Authorities have failed to undertake demarcation of the suit property and have instead issued a public notice published in a daily newspaper dated 07.07.2026 proposing demarcation only in respect of the adjoining lands. Inviting attention to the newspaper publication (Annexure D/1), it is contended that, except the suit land bearing Khasra Nos. 841/2 and 842/2, all adjoining lands are proposed to be demarcated. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no objection whatsoever to the demarcation proceedings, provided the suit land is also demarcated in terms of the order passed by the learned trial Court. It is further urged that the evidence of the parties has already been concluded and the matter is at the stage of final arguments. Therefore, if the demarcation report is received at this stage, liberty may be reserved in favour of the petitioner to avail such remedies as may be available in law, if occasion so arises, against the demarcation report. 3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1 submits that the learned trial Court has already issued a memo directing demarcation of the suit land bearing Khasra Nos. 841/2 and 842/2. In pursuance thereof, the Office of the Collector, Land Records, Bilaspur, issued a communication to the concerned Revenue Authorities on 06.07.2026, wherein the Khasra numbers of the suit property have 4 specifically been mentioned. It is submitted that although the said Khasra numbers may not have found mention in the public notice issued by the Revenue Inspector, Mopka, the suit land is nevertheless required to be demarcated along with the adjoining lands. Reliance is placed on Annexure R/1-1 issued by the Collector, Land Records, Bilaspur. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5. The grievance of the petitioner is confined to the fact that the suit land bearing Khasra Nos. 841/2 and 842/2, admeasuring 0.71 acres, is allegedly not being demarcated by the Revenue Authorities, notwithstanding the direction issued by the learned trial Court. However, a perusal of Annexure R/1-1 dated 06.07.2026 reveals that the suit land bearing the aforesaid Khasra numbers has also been included in the proposed demarcation. In view of the said document, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present petition with an observation that the Revenue Authorities shall carry out demarcation of the suit land bearing Khasra Nos. 841/2 and 842/2 strictly in terms of the order dated 16.06.2026 passed by the learned trial Court. 6. It is expected that all the parties shall extend full cooperation in the demarcation proceedings to be carried out by the revenue authorities. Liberty is reserved in favour of the parties to avail such remedies as may be available to them under law, if any grievance survives against the demarcation report. 5 7. The Collector, Land Records, is directed to ensure that the subject demarcation is carried out within a period of two weeks from today and that the demarcation report is submitted before the learned trial Court in accordance with law. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the petition stands disposed of. 9. Interim order if any, stands vacated. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2026.07.15 19:01:08 +0530