1 2026:CGHC:8621 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 292 of 2025 Bhishma Kinger S/o Late Shri Tulsidas Kinger Aged About 83 Years R/o A-25, Surya Apartment, Katora Talab Road, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.), (Plaintiff) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. Suryakant Tiwari S/o Late Shri Shashi Bhushan Tiwari Aged About 45 Years R/o Presently Arrested By E.D. And Lodged In The Central Jail, Raipur (C.G.), (Main Defendant- 1) 2. Anupam Cooperative Housing Society Limited Raipur (Dissolved), By Cooperative Inspector, Office Of The Sub-Registrar, Cooperative Societies, First Floor, Vivekananda Complex, Vivekananda Nagar, Pension Bada, Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Ex Parte Def.-2) 3. Indermani Mineral India Private Limited Registered Company, Tower C-1, First Floor, Aishwarya Chamber, G. E. Road, Telibandha, Raipur, 492001, Chhattisgarh (Defendant No. 3) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhishma Kinger, Petitioner-in-person. For Respondent(s) : None Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 18/02/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the order dated 06.02.2025 (Annexure P/1) by which Indermani Mineral India Private Limited through its Director Sunil Kumar Agrawal has been arrayed as party to the suit as per provision of order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC. The petitioner has also assailed the order dated 07.03.2025 passed by the learned trial Court by which the trial Court has directed the SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Digitally signed by SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Date: 2026.02.18 13:02:34 +0530 2 plaintiff to provide document to newly added defendant No.3 and thereafter examination of trial will be conducted as per Order 10 CPC. 2. From perusal of records as well as order sheets of the trial Court, it is quite vivid, that the suit filed by the plaintiff is already at the stage of evidence, therefore, at this juncture it will not be expedient for this Court to set aside the impugned order dated 06.02.2025 by which the trial Court has arrayed M/s. Indermani Mineral India Private Limited as party to the case and also the trial Court has passed the order dated 07.03.2025 by which the trial Court directed the plaintiff to provide document to newly added defendant No. 3 that order is inconformity with principal of natural justice and fair play also as once the party has already been arrayed and all the opportunity should be given to all the defendants to defend their case, as such I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the orders dated 06.02.2025 and 07.03.2025 warranting interference by this Court, therefore, the writ petition is liable to be disposed of and it is disposed of. 3. However, looking to the age of the plaintiff/petitioner who is presently 85 years old, it is deemed to appropriate for this Court to direct the trial Court to expedite the trial within outer limit of one year from the date of production of the copy of the order passed by this Court. It is also directed that the trial Court see that the parties of suit should avoid undue delay in conclusion of the trial and if the parties adopt any delay tactics the trial Court is at liberty to proceed in the matter in accordance with the law as per provisions of CPC. 4. With this observation, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Santosh