Dismissed¶32

Chhabikant Sahu v. Smt. Hemkunwar Sahu

Chhattisgarh HC12 Apr 2026WP227/431/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhabikant Sahu v. Smt. Hemkunwar Sahu and others, WP227 No. 431 of 2026, High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, decided 13/04/2026 (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.) — Article 227 writ petition against trial Court order dated 13.01.2026 in Civil Suit No. H-05A/2025; Order 14 Rule 5 CPC application for framing of additional issues partly allowed (02 of 05 framed); remaining 03 proposed issues held unnecessary to pleadings/substance of dispute; petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The 03 remaining proposed additional issues, which relate to residing of plaintiff No.4 at her matrimonial house and pendency of any revenue proceeding between the parties, need not be framed in the civil suit as they do not bear on the pleadings made by the parties or the substance of the dispute between them. ¶31

Chhabikant Sahu Vs Smt. Hemkunwar Sahu — Writ and Judicial Review | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

Digitally signed bySUMIT SUMIT KUMAR KUMAR Date:2026.04.17 10:56:31 +0530

¶3

2026:CGHC:17021

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

WP227 No. 431 of 2026

¶7

Chhabikant Sahu S/o Late Shri Dularva Sahu Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Shikaripali Tahsil Bagbahara District - Mahasamund (C.G.)

¶8

... Petitioner(s)

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - Smt. Hemkunwar Sahu W/o Late Dularva Aged About 71 Years R/o Village Shikaripali, Police Station Tendukona, Tahsil Bagbahara, DistrictMahasamund (C.G.)

¶11

2 - Ku, Pratima Sahu D/o Late Dularva Sahu Aged About 51 Years R/o Village Shikaripali, Police Station Tendukona, Tahsil Bagbahara, DistrictMahasamund (C.G.)

¶12

3 - Vasukant Sahu D/o Late Dularva Sahu Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Shikaripali, Police Station Tendukona, Tahsil Bagbahara, DistrictMahasamund (C.G.)

¶13

4 - Smt. Somlata Sahu W/o Shashibhushan Sahu D/o Late Shri Dularva Sahu Aged About 42 Years R/o Village And Post Bahrda Kala, Tahsil Arjunda District- Balod (C.G.)

¶14

5 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector Mahasamund, DistrictMahasamund (C.G.)

¶15

... Respondent(s)

¶16

¶17

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajbahadur Singh, Advocate For Respondent No.5 : Mr. Vikhyat Arora, Panel Lawyer for the State

¶18

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.)

¶19

Order on Board

¶20

13/04/2026

¶21

Heard.

¶22

Present is a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 13.01.2026 passed by learned Second District Judge, Mahasamund in Civil Suit No. H-05A/2025, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Order 14 Rule 5 of CPC for framing of additional issues has been partly allowed and out of 05 proposed additional issues, 02 issues have been framed by the learned trial Court.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the defendant No.1 in the suit filed by the respondents No. 1 to 4, the suit was filed for the declaration of title, partition and separate possession and also for permanent injunction and mesne profits in which the petitioner/defendant filed his written statement and thereafter, the learned trial Court has framed issues. Since, the issues which have been framed by the learned trial Court does not cover the entire issues which came out from the dispute between the parties, he proposed 05 additional issues by way of his application dated 21.11.2025 filed before the learned trial Court. After considering the dispute between

¶24

¶25

the parties and pleadings, the learned trial Court vide its order dated 13.01.2026, framed 02 additional issues which have been proposed by the petitioner, however, the other 03 issues are also necessary and relevant for proper adjudication of the dispute between the parties, therefore, the same may also be directed to be framed before the learned trial Court. He would further submit that in absence of any issue, the petitioner may deprive from leading evidence which would cause him irreparable loss, therefore, the petition may be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and further, the learned trial Court may be directed to frame additional issues as proposed by the petitioner.

¶26

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material annexed with the petition.

¶27

The petitioner has not filed the copy of original issues framed by the learned trial Court based on the pleadings of the parties, so that the necessity of the additional issues can be considered. From perusal of the order sheets dated 13.01.2026, it transpires that out of 05 proposed additional issues, the learned trial Court has framed 02 additional issues which are as under :-

¶28

(1) क्या� प्रति�वा�दी� क्र० 01 ने� वा�दी� क्र 0 02 के� ईला�ज में� वार्ष� 1995-96 से� 2016 �के 40,000/- रुपया� प्रति�वार्ष� खर्च� तिकेया� है� ?

¶29

(2) क्या� स्वा० दुलारवा� से�हू के" में#त्या% के� पश्चा�� वा�दी� क्र० 1, 2, 3 एवा( प्रति�वा�दी� क्र० 01 से(या%क्� रूप से� वार्ष� 2016 �के एके से�थ रहै�� थ� एवा( प्रति�वा�दी� क्र० 01 ने� वा�दीप्रश्न भू-मिमें के/ के# तिर्ष है � % उपज�ऊबने�ने�के�लिलाएके% लामिमेंला�केर 17 ब/रवा�लाकेरवा�या�औरप(पलागवा�केरसे(प-र्ण�के# तिर्षभू-मिमेंमें�फें�सिंसे9गकेरवा�या�है� , जिजसेमें�प्रति�वा�दी�क्र० 01 ने�लागभूग 15,00,000/- रूपया�एवा( 5,00,000/- रूपया�खर्च�तिकेया�है� ?

¶30

¶31

The application of the petitioner is also annexed in the petition at page No. 35 (Annexure P-5), by which he proposed 05 additional issues and except the 02 additional issues framed by the learned trial Court, 03 other issues which he proposed is relates to residing of the plaintiff No.4 at her matrimonial house and pendency of any revenue proceeding between the parties. The said proposed issues, in the opinion of this Court, may not be required to frame in the proceeding of the civil suit as it does not bare any issue with respect to the pleadings made by the parties and substance of the dispute between them. Even otherwise, the learned trial Court is empowered under Order 14 Rule 5 of the CPC to frame, delete or alter the issues which has already been framed, before passing the decree. It can not be considered that those proposed issues are also necessary to be framed for proper adjudication of the dispute. The necessary issues have already been framed by the learned trial Court.

¶32

Accordingly, I do not find any merits in the present petition and the same is hereby dismissed.

¶33

Sd/(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE

¶34

Sumit

Chhabikant Sahu v. Smt. Hemkunwar Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhabikant Sahu v. Smt. Hemkunwar Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akansha Lal Vs Jyothsna George

Siddique Khan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Abc Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Hetram Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Pramod Dansena Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Gopal Rajput Vs Smt. Gulapa Bai Rajput