Phool Kunwar Bai And ORS v. Rakesh Jain And ORS
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
'iy INTHE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASFUR WRITPETITION (227) No^C/2012 PETITIONERS Phool Kunwar Bai widow of late Dhal Singh Sahu, aged about 45 years, Kumari Kalpana D/o.
late Dhal Singh Sahu, aged about 20 years, ^i.l^-T- ?1«NO--:r3l5&b- 3, 'p«wet1tedbys5:£3:i"1-'
Shubham Sahu, son of late Dhal Singh Sahu, aged about 14 years, ed.»....-"<-e--"~ Oated.
Anupam Sahu son of late Dhal Singh Sahu, aged about 13 years, Petitioner No. 3 85 4 are rainors through : Guardian and natural mother Phoo! Kunwar Bai Widow of late Dhal Singh Sahu, AU Residents of Village Kuthrail, P.8. Anda, Tahsil and District Durg '•• L (C.G.),
VERSUS
RESPONDENTS 1.
Rakesh Jeun son of M.S. Jain, aged about 40 years, Prein Kishor Singh son of Sita Ram 2.
Singh, aged about 47 years, Bofh residents of 'p'9^te>7c'
Nagar, RisaU, Bhilai/) Tahsil andDistrict Durg (C.G.),
'T 3.
Santosh Singh Son of R.N. Singh, aged about years, R/o.
Raj Kamal Nivas,. Ashish Nagar, RisaU, piS'-Uw^^ Bhilai^ Tahsil and District Durg (C.G.), 4.
Dr. Sint. Neeta Manwani, wife of Dr. Sanjay Manwani, aged about 27 years, Caste Sindhi, Occupation Physician, R/o.
Sadanan Chanibers, Ashishnagar, Risali, t-«>'*- Bhilai/) Tahsil and Disti-ict Durg (C.G-), Sint. Archana Shah wife of Pravesh I Shah, aged about 39 years, R/o.
z-| P'S.-Cff^o-l-i'S^ i MIG-137, Padmanabhpur, Durg,4 | TahsUand District Durg (C.G.), | 5.
6.
State of Chhattisgarh, Through :
The Collector, Durg (C.G.), ffi "^ • WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLEf 226^/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
^ XI-HC-78 ~F3{ •^l'iild'4, ^Tll'M'le, [sK'll^y _^^2.a..^.f.^<^/( WRWI th*11<« aii^n^T (1pi3^?) TOIIW^ltet 311^1 ^WiCT'^'5! liltRlf tf 'fs^t TfSregT ^;3iRn3ii^r sn^ii ^i R-ti'* ^nsn^ispRW S:B. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE 1'RITINKER DIWAKER 20.12.2013:
+ Shri Uttam Pandey, coun ^el for the petitioners. ShriSunil Verma, Advocjate under the authority of Shri Jitendra Gupta, counsel for resfrondents No. 1 to4. Shri DeepakJain, couns^l for respondent No.5. Shri Chandresh Shrivast^va, PL for the State/respondent N6.6.
Learned counsel for the| petitioners wants to withdraw this petition with liberty to avaf) the remedy available to him underthe law.
I The petition is,according|y, dismissedas withdrawn with kthe aforesaid liberty.
SdA Pritinker Diwakar Judge ^ II ^t