Ramila Verma Vs Bisoharam Verma — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Ramila Verma Vs Bisoharam Verma — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

1

AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Digitally signed by AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Date: 2026.06.18 17:44:38 +0530

2026:CGHC:24160

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

MCC No. 857 of 2025

1 - Ramila Verma D/o Bisoha Verma Aged About 53 Years R/o Village- Sinoudha Tehsil- Tilda, Raipur (C.G.)

2 - Urmila Verma D/o Bisoha Verma Aged About 51 Years R/o Village- Tarashiv Tehsil- Tilda, Raipur (C.G.)

3 - Pramila Verma D/o Bisoha Verma Aged About 49 Years R/o Village- Sakri TehsilPalari, District- Balodabazar, (C.G.)

4 - Mantoria Bai Verma D/o Bisoha Verma Aged About 47 Years R/o Village- Urkura, District- Raipur (C.G.)

5 - Parmeshwari Verma D/o Bisoha Verma Aged About 45 Years R/o VillageKathiya, Tehsil- Tilda, District- Raipur (C.G.)

6 - Bindeshwari Verma D/o Bisoha Verma Aged About 43 Years R/o Village- Kandul, District- Raipur (C.G.)

... Applicants

versus

1 - Bisoharam Verma S/o Late Kejuram Verma Aged About 75 Years R/o VillageTulsi Tilda, District- Raipur (C.G.)

2 - Churaman Verma S/o Bisoharam Verma Aged About 40 Years R/o Village- Tulsi, Tehsil- Tilda, District- Raipur (C.G.)

3 - Satrupa Verma S/o Bisoha Verma Aged About 38 Years R/o Village- Suleha, District- Baloda-Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.)

2

... Respondents

For applicants : Mr. Krishna Tandon, Adv. For Respondent(s) : None.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi Order On Board

16-6-2026

This case is listed today for orders on the default pointed out by the Registry regarding not filing the application for condonation of delay with affidavit.

On due consideration, the default pointed out by the Registry is waived.

Heard on admission.

The applicants have preferred this MCC praying for the relief to punish the respondents for intentionally breaching and violating the order passed by this Court.

Learned counsel for the applicants/defendants submits that, the Civil Suit No. 9A/2018 filed by the respondent No. 1/plaintiff Bisauharam Verma was allowed in his favour by the trial Court/Civil Judge Class 2, Tilda, Distt. Raipur. The First Appeal bearing Civil Appeal No. 60/2023 filed by the applicants/appellants therein was rejected by the 14^th Distt. Judge, Raipur. Thereafter, the applicants filed second appeal bearing SA No. 396/2024 before this Court. He further submits that, during pendency of the civil suit and first appeal, the applicants/defendants were cultivating the subject land, therefore, they filed an application before this Court in the second appeal under Order

3

39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, in which, order dated 298-2024 of status quo was passed by this Court, but respondents are not allowing the applicants to cultivate suit land. Hence, this MCC may be admitted for hearing.

The applicants has filed order dated 29-8-2024 passed by this Court in SA No. 396/2024, whereby status quo, as was existed, was directed to be maintained in respect of the suit property, but it was not observed in the said order itself as to what was the status at that time. Hence, this Court is not inclined to admit instant MCC.

In view of above, this MCC is dismissed at motion stage.

Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

Sd/-

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge

pathak