1 CGHC010524672025 2026:CGHC:43739 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 1324 of 2025 Jitendra Kumar Sharma S/o Bisahuram Aged About 54 Years R/o Village Belmundi, Tehsil Sakri, Distt. Bilaspur. ... Petitioner versus 1 - Arvind Kumar Sharma S/o Bisahu Ram R/o Belmundi, Tehsil Sakri, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Narendra Kumar Motwani S/o Late Dularam Motwani Aged About 45 Years R/o Ward No. 36, Near Santoshi Mandir Torwa Chowk, Matrchaaya, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Abhishek Yadav S/o Ishwarlal Yadav Aged About 30 Years R/o Opposite To Agrawal Lakdi Taal Chantidih, Tehsil And Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Satish Kumar Kaushik S/o Shivprasad Kaushik Aged About 32 Years R/o Gram Chatauna Tehsil Sakri, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Sharma, petitioner in person For Res. No. 1 : Mr. Shikhar Sharma, Advocate For Res. Nos. 2 to 4 : Mr. Arjit Tiwari, Advocate AMITA DUBEY Digitally signed by AMITA DUBEY Date: 2026.10.09 11:42:35 +0530 2 SB: Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board 08/10/2026 1. Heard on I. A. No. 4 of 2026, which is an application for permission to appear and argue in person filed by the petitioner, Mr. Jitendra Kumar Sharma. 2. On due consideration and the reason assigned in the application (I. A. No. 04 of 2026), the same is allowed. Mr. Jitendra Kumar Sharma is permitted to appear in person and argue the matter. 3. Also heard on application (I. A. No. 05 of 2026), which is an application for withdrawal of the instant case. 4. Mr. Jitendra Kumar Sharma, petitioner in person would submit that during pendency of this petition, he and respondent No. 1 Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma who is his brother, entered into a compromise and settled their dispute amicably and presently, he does not want to press this writ petition and seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the same. 5. Mr. Shikhar Sharma, learned Advocate appearing for the respondent No. 1 have no objection to the submission made by petitioner in person. 6. Mr. Tiwari, learned Advocate appearing for respondent Nos. 2 to 4 objected the prayed made by petitioner in person and would submit that respondent Nos. 2 to 4 are the purchaser of the subject property and their right would be affected if the petitioner and respondent No. 1 entered into compromise and withdraw the 3 present petition therefore, the petitioner in person may not be allowed to withdraw this writ petition and decide the same on merits. 7. I have heard Mr. Sharma, petitioner in person and learned counsel for the respective respondents and perused the material available on record. 8. Considering the fact that the petitioner in person and the respondent No. 1 have settled their dispute and the petitioner in person does not want to press this petition on that ground, this Court inclined to permit the petitioner in person to withdraw the present writ petition however, the respondent Nos. 2 to 4 are at liberty to raise their grievances in appropriate proceedings if so advised. 9. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ami