Digitally signed by SAGRIKA SAGRIKA AGRAWAL AGRAWAL Date:

2026.05.09

11:34:01 +0530 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 1026 of 2024

1 - Smt. Namrata Sharma D/o Late Murli Manohar Mishra Aged About 50 Years W/o Sunil Sharma, R/o Bramhanpara, Kasdeol, Tahsil- Kasdol, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, C.G. At Present Resident Of Spandan, Bazar Chowk, Yadunandan Nagar, Tifra, Bilaspur, Tahsil And District-

Bilaspur, C.G. (Plaintiff)

... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - Neelima Sharma D/o Late Murli Manohar Mishra, W/o Shri Ravi Sharma Aged About 51 Years R/o Radhakrishna Marble And Granite Pvt. Ltd. N.H.-8, Gam Morchana, District- Rajsamand (Rajasthan) Pin-

313326 (Defendant)

2 - Manish Kumar Mishra S/o Late Murli Manohar Mishra Aged About 46 Years R/o Bramhanpara, Kasdeol, Tahsil- Kasdol, District- Balodabazar-

Bhatapara, C.G. (Defendant)

3 - Divya Pathak D/o Late Murli Manohar Mishra, W/o Shri Sanjeev Pathak Aged About 43 Years R/o B- 505, Sunflower Society, Thakur Village, Kandivali (E), Mumbai (Maharashtra) Pin- 400101 (Defendant)

4 - Deepika Tiwari D/o Late Murli Manohar Mishra, W/o Deepak Tiwari Aged About 40 Years R/o House No. H-5/2, Resham Colony, Shriram Nagar, Kanker, District- North Bastar Kanker, C.G. Pin - 494334 (Defendant)

... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

Order on Board

22/04/2026

1. The present is a writ petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India against the impugned order dated 23.09.2024 passed by learned Civil Judge, Class-I, Kasdol, Dist- Balodabazar Bhatapara in Civil Suit No. A/15/2019 whereby the application under Section 65 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 filed by the defendant No. 3 was allowed and he was permitted to prove the document by leading secondary evidence.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is a plaintiff before the learned trial Court. She is prosecuting a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the defendant before the learned trial Court with respect to the suit property total area 6.978 Hec. of land of various Khasra Nos, situated at Village- Kasdol, Dist- Balodabazar Bhatapara. She pleaded in the plaint that the original owner of the property was Late Daulat Ram who is having two sons and three daughters. The plaintiff is one of the daughter of his one son Murli Manohar who has already died. The suit property was ancestral property of her father and there was no partition between them. Her father has died on 21.12.2016 and after death of her father, his all legal heirs having equal right and title over the suit property. However, the name of defendant No. 1 was mutated in the revenue record. The defendants denied the claim of the plaintiff with the pleading that the land of Khasra No. 1464 and 1469/3, Area 0.150 and 5.930 Hec. was obtained by father of the plaintiff Late Murli Manohar on a mutual partition between Late Kanhaiya Lal and Late Murli Manohar who are the brothers. After death of Murli Manohar, the property was obtained by defendant No. 1 in partition proceeding duly prosecuted before the Tehsildar, Kasdol and she is the sole title and possession holder of the suit property which was given by defendant No. 1 to his grand son by executing a deed. He is also submit that during the pendency of the suit, the defendants have filed a copy of deed executed by defendant No. 1 in the form of statement which was being taken on record and to prove the said document.

3. The defendant No. 3 has filed an application under Section 65 of Evidence Act for leading secondary evidence. In the application, the defendant No. 3 averred that the defendant No. 1 has executed a deed in favour of her grand son Abhyuday Manish Mishra by executing a deed dated 28/03/2021. The original copy of the said deed could not be found as the same is missing. However, its attested true copy has been filed by the defendant No. 3 which